Peshat
Level:
Categories of Agunot by Dr. Robert Gordis
In sum, four principal categories of the agunah have emerged in modern
times and are on the increase:
1. A man divorces his wife in the civil courts and possibly even
remarries, but refuses to give his wife a get, either because of malice or
greed. All too often the husband tries to extort money from his wife in
exchange for the get.
2. A man disappears without leaving a trace, so that he is not available
to issue the divorce that halakhah demands. During the early decades of the
20th century , when mass Jewish immigration to the United States from Eastern
Europe reached its height, Yiddish newspapers published a regular feature,
"The Gallery of Missing Husbands," asking readers to help locate the
errant spouses. Together with photographs, there would appear pathetic pleas
for help from the deserted wives.
3. The man is lost in military action or dies in a mass explosion. In
modern war, combatants are often blown to bits. Where there is no hard evidence
that the soldier is dead, the wife becomes an agunah, since halakhah has no
such category as "declared" or "legally" dead.
4. Not strictly a case of "desertion" but similar to it is the
rarer case of a childless widow who, according to halakhah, requires halitzah
(release) from her husband's brother before she can remarry. [Biblical law
requires her brother-in-law to marry her to perpetuate the dead husband's
"name" by providing his wife with a child. The ceremony of halitzah
releases the widow from this obligation.] This situation has also served as an
occasion for extortion.
Targum
1:6 Then she arose with her daughters-in-law and returned from the field of
Moav, for she was informed by an angel, in the field of Moav, that the Lord had
remembered his people, the Torah teacher, giving them bread, through the merit
of the Judge Ivtzan by virtue of the prayer which he prayed before the Lord; he
is Boaz the Pious.
1:7 She went forth out of the place where she had been, and her two
daughters-in-law with her; and they were walking on the way to return to the
1:8 Said Naomi to her daughters-in-law: "Go, return each to her
mother's house. May the Lord do kindness unto you, just as you have done unto
your deceased husbands, refusing to marry [literally “to take a man”] after their death,
and unto me, whom you have provided for and sustained.
1:9 "May the Lord reward you fully for the kindness which you have
shown to me, and by virtue of that reward may each of you find rest in the
house of her husband." Then she kissed them, and they lifted up their
voices and wept.
1:10 Said they unto her: "We will not return to our people and our
gods, but with you will we return to your people, to become proselytes."
1:11 Then said Naomi: "Return, O my daughters. Why should you go with
me? Do I still have children in my womb that they might be husbands unto you?
1:12 "Return, my daughters, from following me. Go unto your people, for
I am too old to be married. Should I say: 'Now, if I were a young woman, having
hope, verily! should I be married this very night and should I bear sons,'
1:13 "Would you wait for them until they grew up, like a woman who
waits for a small brother-in-law to marry her? Because of them would you sit
tied down, not marrying? Pray, my daughters, do not grieve me, for I am more
embittered than you, because a stroke from the Lord has come forth against
me."
1:14 Once again they lifted their voices and wept; and Orpah kissed her
mother-in-law, but Ruth clung unto her.
1:15 Then said she: "Behold, your sister-in-law has returned to her
people and to her gods. Return after your sister-in-law to your people and your
gods!"
1:16 But Ruth said: "Do not coax me to leave you, to turn from
following you, for I desire to become a proselyte." Said Naomi: "We
are commanded to keep the Sabbaths and holidays, not to walk more than two
thousand cubits." Said Ruth: "Wheresoever you go I shall go."
Said Naomi: "We are commanded not to spend the night together with
non-Jews." Said Ruth: "Wherever you lodge I shall lodge." Said
Naomi: "We are commanded to keep six hundred thirteen commandments."
Said Ruth: "That which your people keep, that I shall keep, as though they
had been my people before this." Said Naomi: "We are commanded not to
worship idolatry." Said Ruth: "Your God is my God."
1:17 Said Naomi: "We have four methods of capital punishment for the
guilty -- stoning, burning with fire, death by the sword, and hanging upon the
gallows." Said Ruth: "To whatever death you are subject I shall be
subject." Said Naomi: "We have two cemeteries." Said Ruth:
"There shall I be buried. And do not continue to speak any further. May
the Lord do thus unto me and more if [even] death will separate me from
you."
1:18 When she saw that she insisted upon going with her, she ceased to
dissuade her.
Rashi
1:7 So she departed from the
place Why was (this) stated? Indeed, it was already
stated (verse 6), “and she returned from the fields of
1:12 For I have become too old
from belonging to a man (I.e.,) that I should
marry him and bear sons, and you would (then) marry them, for they (such sons)
would not be forbidden to you (as husbands), and you would not be forbidden
them by dint of (the prohibition against a man marrying) the wife of his
(older) brother who was not in his world (i.e., who died before he was born),
who (i.e., the widow) is not bound to the levirate, since Machlon and Chilion
were not Halachically married to them, for they were Gentiles (and therefore
would not be considered their brother’s wives), and they had not converted (at
marriage), and (only) now were they coming to convert, as it is stated (verse
10), “(No,) but with you we will return to your nation.” Henceforth, we will
become one nation.
(Even) if I were to say (that) there is hope for me (I.e.,) for even if my heart were to tell me
(that) there is hope for me to marry again and to bear sons.
Even (if) I were to marry this very night And moreover, even if I were to conceive male
offspring this (very) night.
Or had I even borne sons Or even if I had
already borne sons.
1:13 Would you wait in hope for
them (The v denotes a question
posed) in wonder, “Would you perhaps wait (in hope) for them until they grow
up?” (Cf.) the expression of (Psalms 146:5), “whose hope (urca) is in the Lord his God.”
Tie yourself down - תעגנה (This is) an expression of being restricted and
confined, (from the root dug) as in (Taanith
23a), “He drew a (confining) circle and stood within it.” And some interpret (vbdg, as stemming from the
root Idg), an expression denoting anchoring, but this
is not possible, for if so, the b should
have been punctuated with a dagesh (forti to replace the missing b) or written (with) two b’s
(one as the radical and the other for the feminine plural).
"Should you wait for them to grow up? Should
you shut yourselves off for them (te'agenah) and have no husbands?"
(Ibn Ezra, perhaps deliberately, notes that the word is unique by
writing that it "has no friend".)
Rashi in his commentary on Ruth tries to show that actually the root here is
עוג and that the word תעגנה
is the feminine plural future form of the verb. His proof for this is that if
the nun was part of the root, it should have had a dagesh or
appeared twice. He still says the word means "restriction", but gives
the example of Honi HaMe'agel who
"עג עוגה ועמד
בתוכה" - drew (ag) a circle and stood
inside it until it rained.
However, Avineri in Heichal Rashi points out that according most grammarians
the nun is part of the root (for example the Radak in Sefer
HaShorashim), and even Rashi himself in his commentary on Bava Kama 80a (s.v. ha'aguna)
connects the word aguna and the verse in Ruth.
For there has gone forth against me the hand of
the Lord Rabbi Levi said (Ruth
Rabbah), “Wherever is mentioned ‘the hand of the Lord,’ it is (a reference to)
a plague of pestilence,” and the precedent for all of them is (Exodus 9:3),
“Behold, the hand of the Lord is (upon thy cattle … a very heavy pestilence).”
1:15 Behold your sister-in-law
has returned This (instance of the
word שבה has) its accent at the beginning, under the ש, since it is the past tense. (However, in Esther 2:14) “and in
the morning, she would return (שבה),”
its accent is at the end, on the ה,
since it is the present tense, and likewise, (in) all similar instances.
1:16 Do not urge me Do not press me.
For wherever you go I will go From this our Rabbis, of blessed memory,
derived (Yeb. 47b), “(If) a (potential) proselyte comes to convert, we inform
him of some of the punishments (for transgressing the commandments), so that if
he wishes to withdraw from it (i.e., from his intention to convert), he can
withdraw,” for from the words of Ruth, you can learn what Naomi (must have)
said to her. (Naomi said,) “We are forbidden to venture forth outside the
boundary (of 2,000 cubits beyond the city limits) on the Sabbath.” She (Ruth)
said to her, “Wherever you go, I will go.” “We are forbidden to seclude
ourselves a woman with a man who is not her husband.” She (Ruth) said to her,
“Wherever you lodge, I will lodge.” “Our nation is separated from other nations
by 613 commandments,” (to which Ruth replied,) “Your nation is my nation.” “We
are forbidden idol worship,” (to which Ruth replied,) “Your God is my God.”
“Four deaths (i.e., types of capital punishment) were delegated to the Beth Din
(to punish sinners),” (to which she replied,) “Where you die, I will die.” “Two
burial plots were delegated to the Beth Din (to bury those executed), one for
those stoned and those burned and one for those executed by decapitation and
those strangled.” She (Ruth) said to her, “and there will I be buried.”
1:17 Thus may the Lord do to
me (I.e.,) as He has begun to afflict me, for His
hand has gone forth against me, killing my husband and (causing me) to lose my
possession (lit., to descend from my possessions).
And thus may he continue If (anything) shall make a separation between
me and you except death.
1:18 So she desisted from
speaking to her From Here (our Rabbis) derived “We do not overburden him (the potential
convert), and we are not overly meticulous with him (concerning the
commandments).” (ibid.)
Hakham Shimshon Raphael Hirsh states that the Hebrew
word for bride - kallah - means
‘completion’ as in: “beyom kallot hamishkan - the day the
tabernacle was completed.”
In his commentary on Bereshit (Genesis) 43:20, Rashi equated crying and
beseeching. Thus we learn that the right kind of tears can be shed to beseech
HaShem to hear our prayer.
Crying, בכי – bechi is from the same root as
confusion, nevucha. We see this confusion in:
Shemot (Exodus) 14:3 … They are confused (nevochim) in the land,
the desert has closed them in.
The word for "sister-in-law" (Yevamah) that is used here is very
unusual for the context. What we translate as “sister-in-law” is in the original Hebrew a
word that signifies a levirate relationship. The Torah dictates that if a
married man dies childless, the widow is to marry her dead husband's brother,
preferably the eldest. The firstborn son they produce together is considered a
continuation of the dead husband's line. This practice is known as Yibum,
or levirate
marriage. The brother-in-law is called the Yavam; the widow is called
the Yevamah.
Mother-in-law = Chamot, from the root cham meaning ‘hot one’.
Gemarah
Level:
Talmud Babli
Sotah 42b These four were born to Harafah
in
Raba expounded: As a reward for the four tears which Orpah dropped upon
her mother-in-law, she merited that four mighty warriors should issue from her;
as it is said: And they lifted up their voice and wept again.
Yevamoth 47b The Master
said, ‘If a man desires to become a proselyte . . . he is to be addressed as
follows: "What reason have you for desiring to become a proselyte . .
." and he is made acquainted with some of the minor, and with some of the
major commandments’. What is the reason? — In order that if he desire to
withdraw let him do so; for R. Helbo said: Proselytes are as hard for
…
‘He is not, however,
to be persuaded, or dissuaded too much’. R. Eleazar said: What is the
Scriptural proof? — It is written, And when she saw that she was steadfastly
minded to go with her, she left off speaking unto her. ‘We are forbidden’, she
told her, ‘[to move on the Sabbath beyond the] Sabbath boundaries’! — ‘Whither
thou goest’ [the other replied] ‘I will go’.
‘We are forbidden private meeting between man and woman’! — ‘Where thou
lodgest. I will lodge’
‘We have been commanded six hundred and thirteen commandments’! — ‘Thy
people shall be my people’.
‘We are forbidden idolatry’! — ‘And thy God my God’.
‘Four modes of death were entrusted to Beth din’! — ‘Where thou diest,
will I die’.
‘Two graveyards were placed at the disposal of the Beth din’! — ‘And
there will I be buried’. Presently she saw that she was steadfastly minded etc.
Yevamoth 47b Our Rabbis taught: If at the present time a man
desires to become a proselyte, he is to be addressed as follows: ‘What reason
have you for desiring to become a proselyte; do you not know that Israel at the
present time are persecuted and oppressed, despised, harassed and overcome by
afflictions’? If he replies, ‘I know and yet am unworthy’, he is accepted
forthwith, and is given instruction in some of the minor and some of the major
commandments. He is informed of the sin [of the neglect of the commandments of]
Gleanings, the Forgotten Sheaf, the Corner and the Poor Man's Tithe. He is also
told of the punishment for the transgression of the commandments. Furthermore,
he is addressed thus: ‘Be it known to you that before you came to this
condition, if you had eaten suet you would not have been punishable with
kareth, if you had profaned the Sabbath you would not have been punishable with
stoning; but now were you to eat suet you would be punished with kareth; were
you to profane the Sabbath you would be punished with stoning’. And as he is
informed of the punishment for the transgression of the commandments, so is he
informed of the reward granted for their fulfillment. He is told, ‘Be it known
to you that the world to come was made only for the righteous, and that
תשב – ‘return’ when the letters are rearranged they spell ‘shabbat’
- שבת
Megilah 31a On New Year we read
On the seventh month, and for haftarah, Is Ephraim a darling son unto me.’
According to others, we read And the Lord remembered Sarah and for haftarah the
story of Hannah. Nowadays that we keep two days, on the first day we follow the
ruling of the other authority, and on the next day we say, And God tried Abraham,
with ‘Is Ephraim a darling son to me’ for haftarah.
Gematria of HaShem (YHVH) is 26. Kabbalah goes even further to show how
the letters themselves are composites of other letters, except for the letter
Yud. The letter Aleph - א is composed of two Yuds and a Vav. Since each letter of the
Aleph-Bais has a pre-assigned numerical value (gematria), and Yud equals 10 and Vav equals 6, the total numerical
value of the letter Aleph would be 10+10+6, or 26, the gematria of
the Four-Letter Ineffable Name of God.
Rashi commenting on:
Rosh HaShana 17b ‘The Lord, the
Lord’: I am the Eternal before a man sins and the same after a man sins and
repents. ‘A God merciful and gracious:’ Rab Judah said: A covenant has been
made with the thirteen attributes that they will not be turned away
empty-handed, as it says, Behold I make a covenant.
Says that Lit., ‘He’. The Divine name YHWH (E.V. ‘the Lord’) designates
the divine attribute of mercy.
Chagigah 14a When R. Dimi came,
he said: Eighteen curses did Isaiah pronounce upon Israel, yet he was not
pacified until he pronounced upon them this verse: The child shall behave
insolently against the aged, and the base against the honourable. Which are the
eighteen curses? — It is written: For, behold, the Lord, the Lord of hosts, doth
take away from Jerusalem and from Judah stay and staff every stay of bread, and
every stay of water,’ the mighty man, and the man of war; the judge and the
prophet, and the diviner, and the elder; the captain of fifty; and the man of
rank, and the counsellor, and the wise charmer, and the skillful enchanter. And
I will give children to be their princes, and babes shall rule over them.
‘Stay’ — this means the masters of the Bible. ‘Staff’ — this means the masters
of the Mishnah, like R. Judah b. Tema and his colleagues. R. Papa and our
Rabbis dispute therein: one says that there were six hundred orders of the
Mishnah, and the other that there were seven hundred orders of the Mishnah.
‘Every stay of bread’ — this means the masters of Talmud, for it is said: Come,
eat of My bread, and drink of the wine which I have mingled. ‘And every stay of
water’ — this means the masters of Aggadah, who draw the heart of man like
water by means of the Aggadah. ‘The ‘mighty man’ — this means the masters of
traditions. ‘And the man of war’ — this means one who knows how to dispute in
the warfare of the Torah. ‘The judge — this means a judge who passes judgment
in strictest accord with truth — ‘The prophet’ — according to the literal
meaning of the word.
Sanhedrin 11b Our Rabbis taught:
The intercalation of a year can be effected [by the Beth din] only in Judea;
but if for some reason [it had been decided upon by the Beth din] in Galilee,
the decision holds good. Hanania of Oni, however, testified: ‘If the
intercalation was decided upon in Galilee, it is not valid.’ R. Judah the son
of R. Simeon b. Pazi asked: What is the reason for the view of Hanania of Oni?
— Scripture states, Unto His habitation shall ye seek and thither thou shalt
come: whatever search you have to make shall be only in the habitation of the
Lord (I.e., Jerusalem the Capital of Judea, which the Lord (Heb. Makom, lit.,
‘the Place’, v. Glos.) has selected as habitation unto Himself.).
Kiddushin 2b Now, why does he
employ shalosh? on account of derakim [ways]! Then let him teach debarim
[things] and sheloshah? — Because he wishes to mention INTERCOURSE, which is
designated ‘way’, as it is written, and the way of a man with a maid. . . Such
is the way of an adulterous woman. Now, that answers for intercourse; but what
can you say of MONEY AND DEED? — [They are] on account of INTERCOURSE. And are
two taught on account of one? — These too are adjuncts of intercourse.
Pesachim 87b R. Hiyya taught: What is meant by the verse,
God understandeth the way thereof, and He knoweth the place thereof? The Holy
One, blessed be He, knoweth that Israel are unable to endure the cruel decrees
of Edom, therefore He exiled them to Babylonia. R. Eleazar also said: The Holy
One, blessed be He, exiled Israel to Babylonia only because it is as deep as
she'ol, for it is said, I shall ransom them from the power of the nether-world
[she'ol]; I shall redeem them from death. R. Hanina said: Because their
language is akin to the language of the Torah. R. Johanan said: Because He sent
them back to their mother's house.[1] It may be compared to
a man who becomes angry with his wife: Whither does he send her? To her
mother's house. And that corresponds to [the dictum] of R. Alexandri, who said:
Three returned to their original home, viz., Israel, Egypt's wealth, and the
writing of the Tables. Israel, as we have said. Egypt's wealth, as it is
written, And it came to pass in the fifth year of King Rehoboam, that Shishak
king of Egypt came up against Jerusalem; and he took away the treasurers of the
house of the Lord. The writing of the Tables, for it is written, and I broke
them before your eyes. It was taught: The Tables were broken, yet the Letters
flew up. ‘Ulla said: [Their exile] was in order that they might eat dates1 and
occupy themselves with the Torah.
RADAK "Chesed,"
Kindness, is an abundance of "Emmet," Truth.
Shabbath 64a For consider: the
dead is likened to semen, for it is written, ‘and whoso toucheth anything that
is unclean by the dead, or a man whose seed goeth from him’; while in respect
to semen it is written, ‘and every garment and every skin, whereon shall be the
seed of copulation. What then is the purpose of ‘raiment and skin’ written by
the Divine Law in connection with the dead? Infer from this that its purpose is
to leave it redundant.
Menuchah is a allegory for
"inheritance" (cf. Devarim 12:9; Melachim Alef 8:56)
Berachoth 6b R. Helbo further said
in the name of R. Huna: Whosoever partakes of the wedding meal of a bridegroom
and does not felicitate him does violence to ‘the five voices’ mentioned in the
verse: The voice of joy and the voice of gladness, the voice of the bridegroom
and the voice of the bride, the voice of them that say, Give thanks to the Lord
of Hosts. And if he does gladden him what is his reward? — R. Joshua b. Levi
said: He is privileged to acquire [the knowledge of] the Torah which was given
with five voices. For it is said: And it came to pass on the third day, when it
was morning, that there were thunders and lightnings and a thick cloud upon the
mount, and the voice of a horn . . . and when the voice of the horn waxed
louder . . . Moses spoke and God answered him by a voice. (This is not so! For
it is written: And all the people perceived the thunderings? — These voices
were before the revelation of the Torah.)
The numerical value of bechi, weeping,
is equal to that of lev, heart, which is thirty-two, because tears are
meaningful when they are sincere expressions of the heart.
Yoma 74b The School of R.
Ishmael taught: Here the phrase ‘affliction’ is used, and there the term
‘affliction’ is used; just as there an affliction through hunger is meant, so
is here an affliction through hunger meant. But let us infer from: ‘If thou
shalt afflict my daughters’? — One should infer concerning the affliction of a
community from another affliction of a community, but not for the affliction of
a community from the affliction of an individual.
Shabbath 152a It was taught, R.
Jose b. Kisma said: Two are better than three, and woe for the one thing that
goes and does not return. What is that? Said R. Hisda: One's youth. When R.
Dimi came, he said: Youth is a crown of roses; old age is a crown of
willowrods.[2]
Kethuboth 20b And what is old?
Sixty years.
Baba Bathra 73a MISHNAH. HE WHO
SELLS A SHIP SELLS [IMPLICITLY] ITS MAST, SAIL, ANCHOR AND ALL THE IMPLEMENTS
NEEDED FOR DIRECTING IT, BUT HE DOES NOT SELL THE CREW, NOR THE PACKING-BAGS,
NOR THE STORES. IF, HOWEVER, HE SAID TO HIM: ‘IT6 AND ALL THAT IT CONTAINS’,
THEN ALL THESE ARE INCLUDED IN THE SALE.
GEMARA. TOREN is the mast; for so it is written: They have taken cedars
from Lebanon to make masts for thee. NES is the sail; for so it is written: Of
fine linen with richly woven work from Egypt was thy sail, that it might be to
thee for an ensign. [As to] OGEN, R. Hiyya taught: These are its anchors;
for so it is written: Would ye tarry for them till they were grown? Would ye
shut yourselves off for them and have no husbands?
Yoma 82a Eliezer said: Since
it is said, With all thy soul, why is it said: With all thy might? And since it
is said: ‘With all thy might’, why is it said: ‘With all thy soul’? [It but
comes to tell you that] if there be a man whose life is more cherished by him
than his money, for him it is said: ‘With all thy soul’; and if there be a
person to whom his money is dearer than his life, for him it is said: ‘With all
thy might’.
Bereshit
(Genesis) 2:24 Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave <01692> unto his
wife: and they shall be one flesh.
Baba Bathra 113a Both, at all events,
[agree that] in, from one tribe to another tribe, Scripture speaks of transfer
through the husband; how [is this] to be inferred? — Rabbah son of R. Shila
said: Scripture states, Ish. Is not Ish written in both? — But, said R. Nahman
b. Isaac, Scripture states, shall cleave. Is not [the phrase], shall cleave,
written in both? But, said Raba; Scripture states. The tribes shall cleave. R.
Ashi said: Scripture states. from One tribe to another tribe, but a son is not
[of] another.
A yebamah who is subject to the levirate marriage may not be married by
a stranger before the levir has submitted to halizah. For further notes on the
whole passage v. Kid., Sonc. ed. pp. 26off. Since Orpah had intercourse with
100 Philistines, she denied herself yibum.
Berachoth 32a And they shall have
eaten their fill and waxen fat, and turned unto other gods. Or, if you prefer,
I can say from here. But Jeshurun waxed fat and kicked.
Gittin 56b In the school of R.
Ishmael it was taught; Who is like thee among the gods [elim]? Who is like thee
among the dumb ones [illemim].
Yevamoth 47b ‘He is not, however,
to be persuaded, or dissuaded too much’. R. Eleazar said: What is the
Scriptural proof? — It is written, And when she saw that she was steadfastly
minded to go with her, she left off speaking unto her. ‘We are forbidden’, she
told her, ‘[to move on the Sabbath beyond the] Sabbath boundaries’! — ‘Whither
thou goest’ [the other replied] ‘I will go’.
‘We are forbidden private meeting between man and woman’! —
‘Where thou lodgest. I will lodge’
‘We have been commanded six hundred and thirteen
commandments’! — ‘Thy people shall be my people’.
‘We are forbidden idolatry’! — ‘And thy God my God’.
‘Four modes of death were entrusted to Beth din’! — ‘Where
thou diest, will I die’.
‘Two graveyards were placed at the disposal of the Beth
din’! — ‘And there will I be buried’. Presently she saw that she was
steadfastly minded etc.
* * *
Romans 6:4 Therefore we are buried with him by
baptism into death: that like as Mashiach was raised up from the dead by the
glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.
Rashi [Toldot -9] says he
was "nitman" in the Yeshiva of Shem and Ever for fourteen years. The
word "nitman" (Hatmana - buried) means to totall submerse.
Yoma 87a FOR TRANSGRESSIONS
COMMITTED BY MAN AGAINST HIS FELLOWMAN THE DAY OF ATONEMENT PROCURES NO
ATONEMENT, but it is written: If one man sin against his fellow-man, God
[Elohim] will pacify him?16 ‘Elohim’ here means ‘the Judge’.
Midrash
Level:
Midrash Rabbah Ruth II:11 THEN SHE AROSE WITH HER DAUGHTERS-IN-LAW, THAT
SHE MIGHT RETURN FROM THE FIELD OF MOAV; FOR SHE HAD HEARD IN THE FIELD OF MOAV
HOW THAT THE LORD HAD REMEMBERED HIS PEOPLE (I, 6). She heard from peddlers
making their rounds from city to city. And what was it she heard? HOW THAT THE
LORD HAD REMEMBERED HIS PEOPLE IN GIVING THEM BREAD.
Midrash Rabbah Ruth II:12 AND SHE WENT FORTH OUT OF THE PLACE WHERE SHE
WAS (I, 7). AND SHE WENT FORTH. Was she then the only one that went forth from
the place? Did not many camel-drivers and how many ass-drivers also go forth?
And yet it says only AND SHE WENT FORTH? R. ‘Azariah in the name of R. Judah b.
R. Simon explained: The great man of a city is its shining light, its
distinction, its glory, and its praise. When he departs, its brilliance, its
distinction, its glory, and its praise depart with him…. AND THEY WENT ON THE
WAY TO RETURN UNTO THE
Ruth II:13 AND NAOMI SAID UNTO HER TWO DAUGHTERS-I N-LAW: GO, RETURN EACH OF YOU TO
HER MOTHER’S HOUSE (1, 8)-i.e. to her people’s house. The mother of Abnimos of
Gadara died, and R. Meir went up to condole with him’ and he found them sitting
in mourning. Some time later his father died, and R. Meir again went up to
condole with him, and found them engaged in their normal occupations. He said
to him: ‘It appears to me that your mother was more dear to you than your
father!’ He answered him: ‘Is it not then written, TO HER MOTHER'S HOUSE, but
not "to her father's house"?’ R. Meir answered him: ‘Thou hast spoken
well, for a heathen indeed has no father.’
Ruth II:14 THE LORD DEAL KINDLY WITH YOU (ib.). R. Hanina b. Adda said: The ketib
is ya'aseh. He certainly will deal kindly with you. AS YE HAVE DEALT WITH THE
DEAD, in that ye busied yourselves with their shrouds; AND WITH ME, in that
they renounced their marriage settlement. R. Ze'ira said: This scroll [of Ruth]
tells us nothing either of cleanliness or of uncleanliness, either of
prohibition or permission. For what purpose then was it written? To teach how
great is the reward of those who do deeds of kindness.
TURN BACK, MY DAUGHTERS, GO YOUR WAY (I,12). R. Samuel b. Nahmani said
in the name of R. Judah b. Hanina: Three times is it written here [1:8, 1:11,
and 1:12] ' turn back’, corresponding to the three times that a would-be
proselyte is repulsed [A would-be proselyte is not accepted with open
arms, but first repulsed, being warned of the difficulties of Judaism, to make
sure of the sincerity of his convictions.]
Ruth II:15 THE LORD GRANT YOU (I, 9). R. Jose said: All the boons and all the
consolations which the Holy One, blessed be He, is destined to bestow on
Solomon, as it is written, And God gave Solomon wisdom and understanding (I
Kings V, 9), shall come from you. THAT YE MAY FIND REST (I, 9). The ketib is u’
mzen. One of you will find rest, not both. EACH OF YOU IN THE HOUSE OF HER
HUSBAND (ib.). From this we see that a woman has no contentment except in her
husband's house. THEN SHE KISSED THEM, AND THEY LIFTED UP THEIR VOICE AND WEPT.
AND THEY SAID TO HER... AND NAOMI SAID: TURN BACK, MY DAUGHTERS, WHY WILL YE GO
WITH ME? HAVE I YET SONS IN MY WOMB, THAT THEY MAY BE YOUR HUSBANDS (I, 9-11)?
Can then a man marry the widow of his brother [who became widowed] before he
was born?
Ruth II:16 TURN BACK, MY DAUGHTERS, GO YOUR WAY (I,12). R. Samuel b. Nahmani said
in the name of R. Judah b. Hanina: Three times is it written here [1:8, 1:11,
and 1:12] ' turn back’, corresponding to the three times that a would-be
proselyte is repulsed; but if he persists after that, he is accepted. R. Isaac
said: [It is written,] The stranger did not lodge in the street (Job XXXI, 32):
A man should rebuff with his left hand, but bring near with the right.
Ruth II:16 TURN BACK, MY DAUGHTERS, GO YOUR WAY (I,12). R. Samuel b. Nahmani said
in the name of R. Judah b. Hanina: Three times is it written here [1:8, 1:11,
and 1:12] ' turn back’, corresponding to the three times that a would-be
proselyte is repulsed; but if he persists after that, he is accepted. R. Isaac
said: [It is written,] The stranger did not lodge in the street (Job XXXI, 32):
A man should rebuff with his left hand, but bring near with the right. FOR I AM
TOO OLD TO HAVE A HUSBAND, etc. SHOULD I EVEN HAVE A HUSBAND TO - NIGHT (I,
12). R. Johanan said: The Torah teaches us a lesson of decency, that
intercourse should take place not by day but by night. That is the meaning of
what is written, In the evening, she went in [to the king], and on the morrow
she returned (Est. II, 14). While it is written here SHOULD I EVEN HAVE A
HUSBAND TO-NIGHT.
Ruth II:17 SHOULD I EVEN HAVE A HUSBAND AND ALSO BEAR SONS (I, 12). Thus if I had
had a husband this night, I might have borne sons; but even in this case, WOULD
YE TARRY FOR THEM TILL THEY WERE GROWN (I, 13)? Can ye then sit and wait until
they are grown? WOULD YE SHUT YOURSELVES OFF FOR THEM AND HAVE NO HUSBANDS
(ib.)? You might remain agunahs without ever marrying. NAY, MY DAUGHTERS (ib.):
[translate] woe is me, my daughters, FOR IT GRIEVETH ME MUCH FOR YOUR SAKES.
meaning on account of you, FOR THE HAND OF THE LORD IS GONE FORTH AGAINST ME:
against me, against my sons, and against my husband.
Ruth II:19 R. Levi said: Wherever the ’hand’ of the Lord is mentioned, it refers
to the pestilence, and the locus classicus is the verse, Behold, the hand of
the Lord is upon thy cattle (Exodus IX, 3). Bar Kappara said: They asked for
the ‘hand’, and the ’hand’ smote them with pestilence. R. Simon said: The
pestilence smote those that went out, but not those who remained [at home]. The
disciples of R. Nehemiah deduced this fact from the verse, Whithersoever they
went out, the hand of the Lord was against them for evil (Judges II, 15). The pestilence smote those
that ’went out’, but not those who remained. R. Reuben said: Even their
children were anxious for [their death] and said, ‘When will they die, that we
may enter the land!‘
Ruth II:18 R. Hanina, the son of R. Abbahu, interpreted this verse4 to refer to
Moses. Moses said to the Holy One, blessed be He: ' Lord of the Universe! With
the word hen (behold) I uttered thy praise, as it is said, Behold, unto the
Lord thy God belongeth the heaven, and the heaven of heavens (Deuteronomy X,
14), and I did hope that thou wouldest give me preferment,5 but alas! With hen
Thou hast wearied me.6 Thou hast wearied me with the Angel of Death, Thou hast
abandoned the hen in my favour,7 and said unto me, Hen! (behold) Thy days approach that thou must die
‘ (Deuteronomy XXXI, 14). And he then turns to
Ruth II:20 AND THEY LIFTED UP (WATTISENAH) THEIR VOICES AND WEPT (I, 14). There is
an alef missing [from WATTISENAH] teaching that they went on their way weeping,
with diminishing strength. R. Berekiah said in the name of R. Isaac: Forty paces
did Orpah go with her mother-in-law, and [for this reason retribution] was
suspended for her descendant4 for forty days, as it is said, And the Philistine
drew near morning and evening, and presented himself forty days (I Sam. XVII, 16). R. Judah said in the name
of R. Isaac: Four miles did Orpah proceed with her mother-in-law, and as a
reward four mighty men descended from her, as it is said, These four were born
to the giant (II Sam. XXI, 22).5 R. Isaac said: The whole of that night when
Orpah separated from her mother, a hundred heathens raped her. That is the
meaning of the verse, And as he talked with them, behold, there came up the
champion... out of the ranks of the Philistines (l Sam. XVII, 23). The ketib is
mimma'arwoth, referring to the hundred men who violated her that night. R.
Tanhuma said: And one dog also, as it is written, And the Philistine said unto
David: am I a dog (I Sam. XVII, 43).
Ruth II:21 AND ORPAH KISSED HER MOTHER-IN-LAW (I,14). All kissing is folly except
on three occasions, the kiss of high office, the kiss of meeting after
separation, and the kiss of parting. Of high office, as it is written, Then
Samuel took the vial of oil, and poured it upon his head, and kissed him (I Sam. X, 1). Of meeting, as it is written,
And he met him in the
Ruth II:21 AND SHE SAID: BEHOLD, THY
SISTER-IN-LAW IS GONE BACK, etc. (I, 15). Once she returned UNTO HER PEOPLE
(ib.), she returned UNTO HER GOD (ib.).
Ruth II:22 AND RUTH SAID: ENTREAT ME NOT TO LEAVE THEE, AND TO RETURN FROM
FOLLOWING AFTER THEE (I, 16). What is the meaning of ENTREAT ME NOT? She said
to her, ‘Do not sin against me; do not turn your misfortunes away from me.’ TO
LEAVE THEE AND TO RETURN PROM FOLLOWING AFTER THEE. I am fully resolved to
become converted under any circumstances, but it is better that it should be at
your hands than at those of another. When Naomi heard this, she began to unfold
to her the laws of conversion, saying: ‘My daughter, it is not the custom of
daughters of
Ruth II:23 Another interpretation: WHITHER THOU GOEST I WILL GO: to the tent of
testimony, to Gilgal, Shiloh, Nob, Gibeon, and the
Ruth II:24 WHERE THOU DIEST WILL I DIE (I, 17) refers to the four forms of capital
punishment inflicted by the Court, viz. stoning, burning, beheading, and
strangulation. AND THERE WILL I BE BURIED; these are the two graves prepared by
the Beth din, one for those who have suffered stoning and burning, the other
for those decapitated and strangled. THE LORD DO SO TO ME AND MORE ALSO. Naomi
said to her: My daughter, whatever good deeds and righteous actions you are
able to acquire, acquire in this world, for in the World to Come, DEATH SHALL
PART THEE AND ME.
Ruth II:24 WHERE THOU DIEST WILL I DIE (I, 17) refers to the four forms of capital
punishment inflicted by the Court, viz. stoning, burning, beheading, and
strangulation.5 AND THERE WILL I BE BURIED; these are the two graves prepared
by the Beth din, one for those who have suffered stoning and burning, the other
for those decapitated and strangled. THE LORD DO SO TO ME AND MORE ALSO. Naomi
said to her: My daughter, whatever good deeds and righteous actions you are
able to acquire, acquire in this world, for in the World to Come, DEATH SHALL
PART THEE AND ME.
Ruth III:5 AND WHEN SHE SAW THAT SHE WAS STEADFASTLY MINDED TO GO WITH HER (I,
18). R. Judah b. Simon commented: Come and see how precious in the eyes of the
Omnipresent are converts. Once she decided to become converted, Scripture ranks
her equally with Naomi.
Midrash Rabbah -
Genesis X:9 Rabbi asked R. Ishmael b. R. Jose: ‘Have you heard from your father the
actual meaning of AND ON THE SEVENTH DAY GOD FINISHED, etc.?’ Said he to him: '
It is like a man striking the hammer on the anvil, raising it by day and
bringing it down after nightfall.’ R. Simeon b. Yohai said: Mortal man, who
does not know his minutes, his [exact] times or his hours, must add from the
profane to the sacred; but the Holy One, blessed be He, who knows His moments,
His times, and His hours, can enter it by a hair's breadth. Genibah and the
Rabbis discussed this. Genibah said: This may be compared to a king who made a
bridal chamber, which he plastered, painted, and adorned; now what did the
bridal chamber lack? A bride to enter it. Similarly, what did the world still
lack? The Sabbath.
Rashi quotes a disturbing midrash:
"Vayeshev Yaakov" — Yaakov wished to dwell (shuv – to sit) in calmness and tranquillity,
but the trouble (lit., rage) of Yosef pounced upon him. God said: "Tzaddikim
want a peaceful life? Is the good that awaits them in the World to Come not
sufficient, that they desire calmness and tranquillity in this world?"
Midrash Rabbah -
Exodus III:8 AND I HAVE SAID: I WILL BRING YOU UP (III, 17) -’Tell them that I will
do what I promised to Jacob their father.’ What did He promise him? ’And I will
also surely bring thee up again’ (Gen. XLVI, 4). And so Jacob promised his
sons: But God will be with you, and bring you back into the land of your
fathers (Gen. XLVIII, 21). Straightway, AND THEY SHALL HEARKEN TO THY VOICE
(Ex. III, 18). Why? Because of this tradition of deliverance which they
possessed, that any redeemer that came and used twice the expression of pakad
(to visit) was known to be a true deliverer.
Midrash Rabbah -
Numbers IX:18 THE LORD MAKE THEE, etc. (ib.). Woe unto the wicked, for they change
the divine Attribute of Mercy into one of ruthlessness! Wherever the Divine
Name is spelled with yod, he, it symbolises the Attribute of Mercy; for it
says, The Lord, the Lord, God, merciful and gracious (Ex. XXXIV, 6), but in our
text it represents the attribute of ruthlessness.
Torah is bread [Sifre on Ekev]
Midrash Rabbah -
Genesis LIV:1 R. Aha observed: Is there a greater despoiler than he [the Tempter]?
And of him Solomon said: If thine enemy be hungry, give him bread to eat, etc.
(Prov.XXV, 21): [resist him] with the bread of the Torah, as you read, Come,
eat of my bread (ib. IX, 5); And if he be thirsty, give him water to drink (ib.
25)-the water of the Torah, as in the verse, Ho, everyone that thirsteth, come
ye for water (Isa. LV, 1).
Midrash Rabbah -
Genesis LXX:5 AND WILL GIVE ME BREAD TO EAT, AND RAIMENT TO PUT ON (XXVIII, 20).
Akilas the proselyte visited R. Eliezer and said to him: Does then all the
benefit of the proselyte lie in what is said, And loveth the proselyte [E. V.
’stranger’] in giving him food and raiment (Deut. X, I8)? Is then that a small
thing in your eyes, replied he, for which our ancestor supplicated, praying,
AND WILL GIVE ME BREAD TO EAT, AND RAIMENT TO PUT ON, while He [God] comes and
offers it to him [the proselyte] on a reed! Then he visited R. Joshua, who
began to comfort him with words: ’Bread’ refers to the Torah, as it says, Come,
eat of my bread (Prov. IX, 5), while ' raiment ' means the [scholar's] cloak:
when a man is privileged to [study the] Torah, he is privileged to perform
God's precepts.
Midrash Rabbah -
Genesis I:4 [The creation of] the Temple was contemplated, for it is written, Thou
throne of glory, on high from the beginning, the place of our sanctuary (Jer. XVII, 12).
Tehillim (Psalm) 1 Blessed is
the man that walketh not in the counsel of the ungodly, nor standeth in the way
of sinners, nor sitteth in the seat of the scornful. 2 But his delight is in the law of
HaShem; and in his law doth he meditate day and night. 3 And he shall be like a tree planted by the
rivers of water, that bringeth forth his fruit in his season; his leaf also
shall not wither; and whatsoever he doeth shall prosper. 4 ¶ The ungodly are not so: but are
like the chaff which the wind driveth away. 5
Therefore the ungodly shall not stand in the judgment, nor sinners in
the congregation of the righteous. 6 For
HaShem knoweth the way of the righteous: but the way of the ungodly shall
perish.
Midrash Rabbah -
Leviticus IX:3 For R. Samuel b. Nahman said: [The duty of] derek-erez preceded the
Torah by twenty-six generations. This is [implied in] what is written, To keep
the way to the tree of life (Gen. III, 24). [First Scripture mentions] the
way (derek) which means derek-erez, and
afterwards [does it mention] ’ The tree of life’, which means the Torah.
Midrash Rabbah -
Leviticus II:2 Of the Levites it is written, And the Levites shall be Mine (Num. VIII,
14). Of Israel it is written, For unto Me the children of Israel are servants
(Lev. XXV, 55). Of the heave-offering it is written, That they take unto Me an
offering (Ex. XXV, 2). Of the firstborn it is written, For all the firstborn
are Mine (Num. III, 13). Of the Sanhedrin it is written, Gather unto Me seventy
men (ib. XI, 16). Of the Land of Israel, For the land is Mine (Lev. XXV, 23).1
Of Jerusalem: The city which I have chosen unto Me (I Kings XI, 36).
Midrash Rabbah -
Leviticus I:10 FROM THE TENT OF MEETING (I, 1). Said R. Eleazar: Even though the Torah
was given as a fence at Sinai, they were not punishable in respect thereof
until it was repeated in the Tent of Meeting. This may be compared to an edict
which has been written and sealed and brought into the province, but in respect
whereof the inhabitants of the province are not punishable, until it has been
clearly explained to them in the public meetingplace of the province. So, too,
with the Torah: even though it was given to Israel at Sinai, they were not
punishable in respect thereof until it had been repeated in the Tent of
Meeting. This is indicated by what is written, Until I had brought him into my
mother's house, and into the chamber of my teaching (S.S. III, 4).1 ’My mother's
house’ means Sinai; ’The chamber of my teaching’ means the Tent of Meeting
for thence Israel were commanded the teaching [i.e. the Law].
Midrash Rabbah -
Exodus V:10 AND HE WENT, AND MET HIM (IV, 27). When it says: Mercy (hesed) and truth are met together;
righteousness and peace have kissed each other (Ps. LXXXV, 11)- ’mercy’ refers
to Aaron, of whom it is said: And of Levi he said: Thy Thummim and Thy Urim be
with Thy holy one-hasideka (Deut. XXXIII, 8), while ‘truth’ refers to Moses, of
whom it says: My servant Moses is not so; he is trusted in all My house (Num.
XII, 7). Hence ’Mercy and truth met together’ when ’He went and met him in the mountain
of God ‘.
Tehillim 31 I have been
forgotten from the heart like the dead.
Midrash Rabbah -
Exodus XXX:9 When he slaughtered an animal, he would distribute to each one a piece
proportionately.1 His son, beholding this distribution, asked him, ' What wilt
thou give me? ‘-He replied, ' Of that which I have prepared for myself.’2 So
God gave to the heathen commandments as it were, in their raw state,3 for them
to toil over,4 not making any distinction among them between uncleanness and
purity; but as soon as Israel came, He explained each precept separately to
them, both its punishment [for non-fulfilment] and - reward, as it says, Let
him kiss me with the kisses of his mouth
(S.S. I, 2).5 Hence: ’ His statutes and His ordinances unto Israel.’
Midrash Rabbah -
Genesis V:4 R. Levi said: Some interpreters, e.g. the son of ‘Azzai and the son of
Zoma, interpret: The voice of the Lord became a guide1 to the waters, as it is
written, The voice of the Lord is over the waters (Ps. XXIX 3). R. Berekiah
said: The upper waters parted from the nether waters with weeping, as it is
written, He bindeth the streams from weeping (Job XXVIII, 11).2 R. Tanbuma
adduced it from the following: He hath made the earth by His power... at the
voice of His giving a multitude of waters in the heavens (Jer. X, 12 f). Now
‘voice’ refers to nought but weeping, as you read, A voice is heard in Ramah,
lamentation and bitter weeping (ib. XXXI, 15).
Midrash Rabbah -
Exodus XXXVIII:4 God replied: ‘I desire words, as it says, "Take with you words, and
return unto the Lord" (Hos. Ioc. cit.), and I will pardon all your sins.’
The ’words’ here referred to are words of the Law, as it says, These are the
words which Moses spoke unto all Israel (Deut. 1, 1). They then said to God: '
We know no Torah.’ ‘Then weep and pray unto Me and I will accept [your
remorse],’ was the Divine assurance.
Midrash Rabbah -
Genesis LIX:6 AND ABRAHAM WAS OLD (ZAKEN). Zaken means, This man has acquired (zeh kanah) two worlds. (Three were crowned
with old age and with abundance of days, and these three were pre-eminent in
their trials, Abraham, Joshua, and David. Abraham was the head of the
Patriarchs. Joshua was the head of the royalty which came from the tribe of
Ephraim, as it says, Out of Ephraim came he whose root is in Amalek (Judg. V,
14), which refers to Joshua. David was the head of the royalty which came from
the tribe of Judah).’
Midrash Rabbah -
Deuteronomy II:20 WHEN THOU SHALT BEGET CHILDREN. This bears out what Scripture
says, The wages of the righteous is life;
the increase of the wicked is sin (Prov.X, 16). ’ The wages of the
righteous is life.’ R. Tanhum says: This refers to Eliphaz, who grew up in
the lap of Isaac.1 ’ The increase of the wicked is sin.’ This refers to Amalek,
who grew up in the lap of Esau. Another explanation: ’ The wages of the
righteous is life’
Midrash Rabbah -
Genesis XCVIII:14 WAIT FOR THY SALVATION, O GOD. R. Isaac said: Everything is bound up
with waiting [hoping]. Suffering is bound up with waiting, the sanctification
of the Divine Name with waiting, the merit of the Fathers with waiting, and the
desire of the World to Come with waiting.6 Thus it is written, Yea, in the way
of Thy judgments, O Lord, have we waited for Thee (Isa. XXVI, 8), which alludes
to suffering;
Midrash Rabbah -
Genesis IX:10 R. Samuel b. R. Isaac said: BEHOLD, IT WAS VERY GOOD alludes to the angel
of life; AND BEHOLD, IT WAS VERY GOOD, to the angel of death. Is then
the angel of death very good? Imagine a king who made a feast, invited the
guests, and set a dish filled with all good things before them: ' Whoever will
eat and bless the king,’ said he, ' let him eat and enjoy it; but he who would
eat and not bless the king, let him be decapitated with a sword.’ Similarly,
for him who lays up precepts and good deeds, lo! there is the angel of life;
while for him who does not lay up precepts and good deeds, lo! there is the
angel of death.
Midrash Rabbah -
Genesis LXXX:7 AND HAMOR SPOKE WITH THEM, SAYING (XXXIV, 8). R. Simeon b. Lakish said:
The Holy One, blessed be He, manifested His love to Israel with three expressions
of love, debikah (cleaving),
hashikah (love), and hafizah (delighting
in). Debikah: But ye that did cleave (hadebekim) unto the Lord your God (Deut. IV, 4).
Midrash Rabbah -
Exodus XV:15 Another explanation: It is written: He sent Moses His servant, and
Aaron whom He had chosen (Ps. CV, 26). As soon as God, as it were, entered, He
smote their firstborn and their gods, for it says: And I plagued Egypt (Josh. XXIV, 5). Also among their gods did the
Lord perform judgments.
Midrash Rabbah - Ruth
II:13
AND NAOMI SAID UNTO HER TWO DAUGHTERS-I N-LAW: GO, RETURN EACH OF YOU TO HER
MOTHER’ S HOUSE (אמה) (1, 8)-i.e. to her people’s3 house (אומתה).
3 - אמה ‘her mother’ is translated as
אומתה ‘her people’.
Midrash Rabbah -
Genesis XXXIV:11 But when that day cometh, of which it is written, For the heavens shall
vanish away like smoke, and the earth shall be worn out like a garment (Isa. LI, 6), then [shall the verse be
fulfilled], And it [sc. the covenant] will be broken on that day (Zech. XI, 11). R. Aha commented: What was
responsible for their rebelling against Me? Was it not because they sowed but
did not cut down, i.e. they gave birth but did not bury?
Midrash Rabbah -
Genesis XXXIII:3 Wherever Elohim (God) is employed it connotes the Attribute of
Judgment: Thus: Thou shalt not revile Elohim- God (Ex. XXII, 27); the cause of
both parties shall come before Elohim-God (ib. 8); yet it is written, And
Elohim heard their groaning, and Elohim remembered His covenant (ib. II, 24);
And Elohim remembered Rachel (Gen. XXX, 22); AND ELOHIM REMEMBERED NOAH.
Midrash Rabbah - Ruth
II:22
When Naomi heard this, she began to unfold to her the laws of conversion,
saying: ‘My daughter, it is not the custom of daughters of Israel to frequent
Gentile theatres and circuses,’1 to which she replied, WHITHER THOU GOEST, I
WILL GO (ib.). She continued: ‘My daughter, it is not the custom of daughters
of Israel to dwell in a house which has no mezuzah,’ to which she responded, '
AND WHERE THOU LODGEST, I WILL LODGE (ib.). THY PEOPLE SHALL BE MY PEOPLE (ib.)
refers to the penalties and admonitions [of the Torah], AND THY GOD MY GOD (ib.)
to the other commandments of the Bible.
Zohar
Level:
Soncino Zohar,
Bereshith, Section 1, Page 8a R’ Simeon was sitting and studying the Torah during
the night when the bride was to be joined to her husband. [Tr. note: i.e. the
eve of Pentecost.] For we have been taught that all the members of the bridal
palace, during the night preceding her espousals, are in duty bound to keep her
company and to rejoice with her in her final preparations for the great day: to
study all branches of the Torah, proceeding from the Law to the Prophets, from
the Prophets to the Holy Writings, and then to the deeper interpretations of
Scripture and to the mysteries of Wisdom, as all these represent her
preparations and her adornments. The bride, indeed, with her bridesmaids, comes
up and remains with them, adorning herself at their hands and rejoicing with
them all that night. And on the following day she does not enter under the
canopy except in their company, they being called the canopy attendants. And
when she steps under the canopy the Holy One, blessed be He, enquires after
them and blesses them and crowns them with the bridal crown: happy is their
portion!
Soncino Zohar,
Vayikra, Section 3, Page 15b ‘We have learnt as follows. From the side of the
Mother issue emissaries of punishment who are armed with the clubs of Geburah
(Severity), and prevail over Mercy, and then the worlds are defective and there
is conflict between them. But when men amend their ways below, punishment is
mitigated and removed, and mercy is awakened and prevails over the evil which
arose from stern judgement, and then there is joy and consolation, as it is
written, “And the Lord was comforted of the evil” (Ex. XXXII, 14). When
judgement is mitigated, all the Crowns return to their places and the keys are
restored to the Mother, and this is called repentance (teshubah, lit.
returning), and the world is forgiven, since the Mother is in perfect joy.’[Tr.
note: The passage which follows is written in so allusive a style that it would
be hardly possible to convey its meaning by a translation. The point of it is
that sin (especially the sin of unchastity)”uncovers the nakedness of the
Mother (Binah),,, and repentance is the covering-up again. The word teshubah
(returning) is also explained to mean, “causing the light from the Ancient Holy
One to return to the Small of Countenance”.]
Vayikra (Leviticus)
26:42-45 And I will remember my covenant with Jacob, Isaac...and Abraham and I
will remember the land... and even in the lands of their enemies, I have not despised
them nor have I found them repulsive intending to destroy them, to break my
covenant with them...for I will remember the covenant.
Soncino Zohar,
Bereshith, Section 1, Page 69b the Scripture says that GOD REMEMBERED NOAH. Said R.
Simeon: Observe that all the time that judgement was being executed there was
no remembering, but only after the chastisement had been completed and the
wicked had been exterminated do we find mention of remembering. For as long as
judgement hangs over the worlds there is no communion of man with God, and the
destroying angel is rampant. But as soon as judgement has run its course and
wrath has been allayed, everything returns to its previous state. Hence we read
“and God remembered Noah”, remembrance being centred in him since he was
entitled “righteous”.’
Soncino Zohar,
Bereshith, Section 1, Page 23a even when they all three agree to condemn, there comes
the right hand which is outstretched to receive those that repent; this is the
Tetragrammaton, and it is also the Shekinah, which is called “right hand”, from
the side of Hesed (kindness).
Yochanan (John) 6:33 For the bread of God is he which
cometh down from heaven, and giveth life unto the world.
Soncino Zohar,
Bereshith, Section 1, Page 7a We may also find enshrined in this passage a mystery
of wisdom, in which all other mysteries are enclosed. We translate: “O Mah,
great is thy goodness, etc.” Mah (“How” or “What”) has already been explained.
Rab (“abundant” or “great”) alludes to the strong and mighty tree: there is
another and a smaller tree, but this one is tall, reaching into the highest
heaven. “Thy goodness” alludes to the light that was created on the first day.
“Which thou hast laid up for those who fear thee”, since He has treasured it up
for the righteous in the world to come: “which thou hast wrought” alludes to
the higher Gan-Eden (Garden-of-Eden, Paradise), as it is written, “The place, O
Lord, which thou hast wrought for thy dwelling” (Exod. XV, 17), to wit, “Thou
hast wrought for them that trust in thee”. “In the sight of the sons of men”
alludes to the lower Gan-Eden where all the righteous abide, as spirits clad in
a resplendent vesture resembling their corporeal figure in this world; this is
meant by “in the sight of man”, i.e. presenting the likeness of the people of
this world.
Soncino Zohar,
Bereshith, Section 1, Page 29b When the upper descended into the lower, it was
filled from the channel of a certain grade which rested on it, corresponding to
that hidden, secret and recondite path above, the difference being that one is
a narrow path and the other a way. The one below is a way, like “the way of the
righteous which is as a shining light” (Prov. IV, 18), whereas the one above is
a narrow path, like. “the track which the vulture knoweth not” (Job XXVIII, 7).
Soncino Zohar,
Bereshith, Section 1, Page 1b “In our land” implies the day of the Sabbath, which
is a copy of the “land of the living” (the world to come, the world of souls,
the world of consolations).
The “containing vessel,” which holds and preserves the Divine
inspiration within a person, is the Torah, as it says (Song of Songs 3:2-4), "... I will seek the
one my soul has loved...I caught hold of him, and I will not let him go until I
have brought him into my mother’s
house and into the room of the one that bore me." Jewish philosophy
explains that the Hebrew phrases "my mother’s house" and "the room
of the one that bore me" refer to the Written Torah (the Scriptures) and the Oral Torah (the entire
corpus of Jewish knowledge, traditionally expounded orally from the Scriptures)
respectively. This is because the function of a house or a room is to
encompass, to contain — in a broader or more particular sense, respectively —
that which is within them, and in our context, these expressions are mystical
allusions to the manner in which Torah study and performance of mitzvos are themselves the
“vessels” which “contain” the light of G-d within the individual Jew.
Soncino Zohar,
Bereshith, Section 1, Page 22b He proceeded: ‘Friends, we must expound the rest of
the verse, since it contains many hidden mysteries. The next words are: I kill
and make alive, etc. That is to say, through the Sefiroth on the right side I
make alive, and through the Sefiroth on the left side I kill; but if the
Central Column does not concur, sentence cannot be passed, since they form a
court of three. Sometimes, even when they all three agree to condemn, there
comes the right hand which is outstretched to receive those that repent; this
is the Tetragrammaton, and it is also the Shekinah, which is called “right
hand”, from the side of Hesed (kindness).
Soncino Zohar,
Shemoth, Section 2, Page 52b THUS THE LORD SAVED ISRAEL... AND ISRAEL SAW THE
EGYPTIAN(S) DEAD. God showed them Egypt's celestial chieftain passing through
the fiery stream, which was at the shore of the Ocean. “Dead” means that he
was deprived of his power.
Soncino Zohar,
Shemoth, Section 2, Page 124b BEHOLD, I SEND.AN ANGEL BEFORE THEE. R. Isaac quoted
in this connection the words: “Let him kiss me with the.kisses of his mouth”
(S.S. 1, 2), and said: ‘It is the Community of Israel who says this (to God).
Why does.she say “Let Him kiss me” instead of “Let Him love me”? Because, as we
have been taught, kissing.expresses the cleaving of spirit to spirit;
therefore the mouth is the medium of kissing, for it is the organ of.the spirit
(breath). Hence he who dies by the kiss of God [Tr. Note: According to the
Haggadah, Moses.and certain other saints died “by the kiss of God”.] is so
united with another Spirit, with a Spirit which.never separates from him.
Therefore the Community of Israel prays: “Let Him kiss me with the kisses of
His.mouth”, that His Spirit may be united with mine and never separate from it.
What is crying? Crying is the involuntary reaction to a process that has
ceased. Our soul becomes confused by certain events. The soul expresses this
confusion in the physical world with crying.
Soncino Zohar,
Bereshith, Section 1, Page 137a But we learn this from another source. It is written,
“As a lily among thorns, so is my love among the daughters” (S. S. II, 2). The
lily may be taken as symbolic of the Community of Israel, which in the midst of
its multitudes resembles a rose among thorns.
When the Torah
(Vayikra 19:32) commands us to "honor the zaken," it is not
referring to age, but rather to one who has studied Torah and is capable of teaching it to
others, as we can see in the Zohar:
Soncino Zohar,
Vayikra, Section 3, Page 87b R. Jose then said: ‘The succeeding verses are to be
taken in their literal meaning, but some remarks may be made on the verse: THOU
SHALT RISE UP BEFORE THE HOARY HEAD, AND HONOUR THE FACE OF AN OLD MAN. The
“hoary head” refers to the Torah, and a man should rise before the Scroll of
the Torah. When R. Hamnuna the Elder saw a Scroll of the Law, he used to rise
and say, “Thou shalt rise up before the hoary head”. Similarly a man should
rise before a man of learning, because he exhibits the holy supernal image and
is emblematic of the supernal Priest.
Soncino Zohar,
Vayikra, Section 3, Page 105b When the king comes he sees all rejoicing as he
ordained, but he lifts up his eyes and sees one man chained and sorrowing.
Soncino Zohar,
Vayikra, Section 3, Page 107a ‘Observe that when God created man and invested him
with high honour, He required of him to cleave to Him in order that he might be
unique and single-hearted, cleaving to the One by the bond of single-minded
faith wherewith all is linked together.
Tehilim
(Psalms) 40:8 I delight to
do thy will, O my God: yea, thy law is within my heart <04578>. (inside
of me)
Soncino Zohar,
Bereshith, Section 1, Page 9b Thus shall ye say unto them: The gods that have not
made the heavens and the earth, these shall perish from the earth and from
under the heavens. (Jer. X, 11). Why has this verse- been written in Aramaic,
with the exception of the last word? It cannot be because the holy angels do
not pay attention to Aramaic and do not understand it, for then all the more
was it appropriate for this verse to be written in Hebrew, so that the angels
should acknowledge its doctrine. The true reason certainly is that the angels,
since they do not understand Aramaic, shall not come to be jealous of man and
do him evil. For in this verse the holy angels are comprised, as they are
called Elohim (gods, powers), and yet they have not made heaven or earth.
Soncino Zohar,
Shemoth, Section 2, Page 33b Therefore the Shunammite woman said, “I dwell among
my people” (2 Kings IV, I3), meaning that she had no desire to separate herself
from the majority, having dwelt hitherto among her people and being known above
merely as one with them.
Zohar, Bereshith, Section
1, Page 28a Because of THE MIXED MULTITUDE, Moshe was buried outside of the Holy
Land. His burial was at the hands of the deputy (Mishneh), and no one knows the
location of his grave to this day. BURIAL MEANS CONCEALMENT, WHEREAS THE
RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD IS REVELATION. SO MOSHE WAS CONCEALED AND BURIED
OUTSIDE THE HOLY LAND BECAUSE OF THE DOMINION OF THE DEPUTY IN THE WORLD. THIS
IS WHY NO ONE CAN KNOW HIS BURIAL SITE UNTIL THE DAY OF THE END OF CORRECTION.
AT THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD, MOSHE WILL BE REVEALED TOGETHER WITH THE TWO
MESSIAHS.
Soncino Zohar,
Bereshith, Section 1, Page 70b AND TETRAGRAMMATON SAID TO NOAH, COME THOU AND ALL
THY HOUSE INTO THE ARK, which conforms with what was said before, that the
master of the house gave him permission to enter; whereas afterwards it was the
wife who speeded him out of the ark, as it is written, AND ELOHIM (=Shekinah)
SPOKE UNTO NOAH, SAYING: GO FORTH FROM THE ARK.
Soncino Zohar,
Bereshith, Section 1, Page 5a The word ‘Ami (my people) may be read ’Imi (with me),
meaning “to be a collaborator with Me”; for just as I made heaven and earth by
a word, as it says: “By the word of the Lord the heavens were made” (Ps.
XXXIII, 6), So dost thou. Happy are those who devote themselves to the study of
the Torah!
Soncino Zohar,
Shemoth, Section 2,page 55a THIS IS MY GOD AND I WILL MAKE HIM A HABITATION; THE
GOD OF MY FATHER, AND I WILL EXALT HIM. “This is my God” refers to the Zaddik,
from whom blessings emanate on the married state; “and I will make him a habitation”
in the place where love is found, namely in the Sanctuary.
Other Commentaries:
Me’am Lo’ez
VERSE 1:6
She rose, with her daughters-in-law, and returned from the Fields of
Moab. For she heard in the Fields of Moab that God remembered His people to
give them bread.
It is made clear that not the women but the men had prevented the family
from returning to the
There is a significant contrast between the present singular form: “she
rose. . .returned...heard” (vgna.. . ca,u . . . oe,u)’ and the plural form of the following verse: “.. . and her two
daughters-in-law ... went” (pl. vbfk,u). At first she and her daughters-in-law went as one, but then it became
apparent that the daughters-in-law were headed in two different directions.
Additionally, the verse conveys that the decision to return to the
Another interpretation is that Naomi rose from the illness that grief
had brought on.
Her decision made, Naomi rose earlier than is customary. She did not
want to be detained by well-meaning neighbors who would insist on a proper
send-off, as befits a great woman. Having heard that the famine was over, she
did not want to lose a minute.
Naomi wisely realized that if she discussed her plans with her
daughters-in-law, they would plead with her to remain. So she kept silent until
the actual time to leave had arrived, and then simply rose to go. Her
daughters-in-law then hurriedly joined her.
Although the present verse says that “she . . . returned,” does
not mean that she actually returned, for the next verse states that “she left
the place.” At this point she had only resolved to return. God, however,
rewards good intentions as if they were accomplished deeds, and the verse says
“she returned.”
These words (“she returned”) accent, moreover, that Naomi went back
empty-handed. Of all Elimelech’s tents and servants and herds and camels and
great wealth, including the ten fields that he had acquired in
What prompted her return was the news that the famine had come to an
end. We are informed that she was told, “God has remembered His people,” which
means that she heard the glad tidings from itinerant peddlers from Eretz
Yisrael. Alternately, she reasoned that if people were once again buying the
peddlers’ luxury wares, they must already have bread in the house.
According to Targum Yonathan, an angel appeared to Naomi in the field to
inform her that the famine was over.
Although Naomi had just risen from her sickbed and was penniless, she
left at once. She did not wait for her neighbors to provide her with food for
the journey, but placed her trust in God to bring her home safely. Thus she
repented for having despaired of God saving
Another opinion is that Naomi did not actually hear any news, but on her
own understood that the famine had ended.
Naomi realized, moreover, that only through the
It is implied that God remembered His people with rain, since the
resulting crops would then “give them bread.” So it was that by the time
Naomi actually returned, the barley was being harvested.
This also indicates that this turn of events was sudden. The famine was
to have lasted longer, but in the merit of the righteous Boaz, it ended
at this time.
Naomi had been informed that the people had not yet repented of the
injustice and strife that had precipitated the famine. So the rain came not
because
Naomi was like that poor guest at the inn who would not join the crowds
that came there to eat and drink, because he could not afford the lavish food.
But one day the innkeeper made a feast for all his guests for which no payment
was required, whereupon the poor guest, too, ate and drank along with the rest.
If Naomi had heard that God ended the famine because the people were
worthy of it, she would not have dared to return. But as He was
providing them with bread out of mercy rather than justice, she came.
At another time in the future, in the days of the prophet
VERSE 1:7
She left the place where she had been, and her two daughters-in-law were
with her. They went on the road back to the
The previous verse recounted that Naomi “rose, with her
daughters-in-law, and returned from the Fields of Moab.” After interjecting,
however, that the famine had ended, the narrative resumes by repeating that
“she left the place where she had been.”
These two verses are similar but not identical. As previously noted, the
first verse indicates that the three women had initially risen as one to
return; the second, that en route “her two daughters-in-law” turned out to be
of two minds. Orpah accompanied Naomi out of politeness, but Ruth longed to
cleave to her.
Others say that when Naomi rose to return, she assumed that her daughters-in-law
were merely seeing her off. Now that they had crossed the border and still “her
. . two daughters-in-law were with her,” she realized that they intended to go
“to the
The reason for the journey was as much to escape the place of their
suffering (“she left the place where she had been”) as to see the longed-for
The Talmud teaches: “The tzaddik (righteous man) of a city is its
radiance and light, its glory and praise. When he departs, the city’s radiance
and light, glory and praise, depart with him.” For the tzaddik influences the
people about him to become righteous.
Thus the scripture records that “Jacob went out of
While Naomi was living in
Of all places in the
Some say that Naomi, ashamed to face the people she had deserted during
the famine, would have preferred to go where she was unknown. Nevertheless, she
returned to her hometown because it afforded the best chances of
supporting her daughters-in-law.
The three women, anxious to get to the
To minimize the danger, they took “the road,” the main thoroughfare,
avoiding deserted side roads. Moreover, it is indicated that they clung
together to avoid seclusion with men, for they were on their way to the holy “
In their eagerness to get there, “they went”—they walked without
stopping to rest.
Our sages observe that they literally walked “on the road.” Too poor to
buy riding animal~ or even shoes to protect their feet, they walked barefoot,
hurting their feet on the road. According to one interpretation, they went on
foot because in their eager haste they also traveled on the festival, when
riding is prohibited.
Every step they took
was with the specific intention of going “to the
As they walked, they studied the laws of conversion. For Ruth and Orpah
were on their way “to..
“When a gentile wishes to convert,” teaches the Talmud, “he is to be
turned away with the left hand and drawn closer with the right.” Naomi thus
drew her daughters-in-law close by teaching them that so precious were converts
in God’s eyes that His Torah warns no less than forty-eight times against
distressing a convert. [On the other hand, she attempted to turn them away, as
the following verses recount.]
VERSE 1:8
Naomi said to her two daughters-in-law: “Go, return each to her mother’s
house. May the Lord deal kindly with you, as you have dealt with the deceased
and with me.”
Even after their husbands died, Ruth and Orpah continued to relate to
Naomi as their mother-in-law, and she still saw in them “her . . .
daughters-in-law.”
The three of them were already “on the road back to the
At first she had thought that her two daughters-in-law “were with her”
(v. 6) only to see her off. But when they reached “the road that led
back to
Another interpretation is that Naomi had thought they were coming with
her to the
To test their determination, Naomi let them taste the hardships of the
journey before telling them to “Go, return.”
The test revealed the difference between her “two” daughters-in3 law.
Ruth remained steadfast and Orpah returned.
Even before testing them, Naomi had perceived Ruth’s purity of heart
and felt closer to her than to Orpah. For the sake of peace, however, she spoke
to the two equally and urged them both to go back. Preferential treatment was
therefore not a factor in Ruth staying and Orpah leaving.
The form “go, return” is significant in this regard. To Orpah, who did
not truly wish to convert, she said simply “go,” that is, go back to
“Return to your mothers’ houses,” she advised, “for I have no house and
no means of supporting you. I may have been like a mother to you; but a real
mother will treat you better than a good mother-in-law.
“Nor be afraid that your mothers will reject you for marrying Jews. God
will deal kindly with you and see that you are welcome.”
Naomi told them to go “each to her mother’s house,” rather than the
father’s, for a number of reasons:
(1) Gentiles then traced their descent through their mothers.
(2) If Ruth and Orpah had displeased their parents by marrying out of their
people, their mothers, being by nature more merciful, would more readily
forgive and accept them.
(3) Generally it is the mother who stays home, while the father goes
out to work. And it is the mother who would care for a widowed daughter
and prepare her dowry.
According to our sages, Ruth and Orpah were daughters of Eglon, king of
By telling them “go, return,” Naomi was in fact offering various
options. One was that they accompany her to
Then again [according to the opinion that before marrying Machlon and
Kilyon, Ruth and Orpah had converted]—they could “go” to
However, God’s kindness would be fuller if they remained faithful than
if they returned to idolatry. This is conveyed by the expression “may [He]
deal.” Although the Hebrew original is written in full (ya’ase, vagh), in pronunciation it is truncated (ya’as, agh) [as if the letter heh v,
(numerical value 5) was missing. God would deal differently with them if
they remained faithful to the Five Books of Moses, than if they did not.]
If they turned back, God would reward them in full for the forty paces
they had accompanied Naomi thus far. This is conveyed by the unexpected
masculine ending of “with you” (ofng instead of the grammatically proper ifng). The numerical value of the final letter (o) is forty.
And if they cleaved to the Jewish people, God’s kindness would culminate
five generations later, in the golden era of Ruth’s great-great-grandson King
Solomon. This is likewise alluded to by the letter v in the written form vagh. The five generations are Boaz, Obed, Ishai, David, Solomon.
The reward for cleaving to Naomi is further hinted at in the word hsng (“with me”), an acronym of Obed (g of scg), the Messiah (n of jhan), David (s of sus), Ishai (h of hah)—all of whom would descend from Ruth.
Naomi continued: “Do not fear that by leaving me now you will forfeit
the merit of your past kindness. Your reward will remain intact; God will deal
kindly with you as you have dealt with the deceased and with me.”
Nor would they lose their reward by being far away from Naomi. God, Who
is “desirous of kindness” (Micah 7:18), would requite their kindness
wherever they went. For kindness [by man is imitative of the divine attribute
of kindness—chesed, and] is one of the pillars that hold up the world, as it
is written: “The world is build on kindness” (Psalms 89:3).
Naomi prayed, “May the Lord deal kindly with you,” because the convert’s
lot in this world is not a happy one, since he must atone for his past sins.
Here, too, Naomi tested their determination to convert. By pronouncing
the term, vagh as if it were
written with one letter missing, she hinted that a convert is shown less
kindness than a born Jew. If they replied: “We know, and we are not worthy of
that other kindness” their sincerity would be made evident.
In her bitterness, Naomi likened kindness to her with kindness to the
dead—’ ‘as you have dealt with the deceased and with me.” Both could rightly be
termed “true kindness” (,nt ka sxj), that is, kindness
without hope of reciprocation. “So poor am I,” she said, “that I can no more
repay your kindness than can the dead.
“But,” she added, “God will pay you back by giving you rest, each in the
home of her husband” (v. 9).
Naomi praised Ruth and Orpah for dealing kindly “with the deceased” by
being good wives to Machlon and Kilyon and, according to the Targum, by
refusing to remarry after they died.
Our sages say that they provided the shrouds and paid for the burials,
although widows are not legally obligated to do so. Naomi therefore blessed
them: “May God deal kindly with you as you have dealt with the deceased. Just
as you clothed the deceased in clean shrouds, so in the World to Come will God
clothe you in the pure souls of tzaddikim, to enable you to appear and bow down
before Him.”
Naomi praised them for their kindness to her also after her sons died—”with
the deceased and [afterwards] with me.” They had mourned for them, says the
Midrash, and they cried “with me.”
Moreover, they gave up their marriage settlements, which they were
entitled to collect from the family’s fields in
An alternate interpretation is that Naomi had co-signed their kethuboth.
Yet, when her sons died, they did not collect from her, but lived with her
until their money ran out. Then they left
“By continuing to deal kindly with me even after my sons died,” said
Naomi, “you showed that your kindness to me while they were living was always
sincere, and not because of your husbands.”
Naomi addressed them in the masculine form (ofng, “with you”) to commend their manly determination and
strength of character. Hence they could not be suspected of ulterior motives.
The acts of kindness they had done for the living and the dead testified to
their purity of heart and their love of God and man.
VERSE 1:9
After Naomi assured her daughters-in-law that their kindness would be
requited in full by God dealing “kindly with you as you have dealt with the
deceased and with me” (v. 8), she added: “In return for giving up your
marriage settlements, may God grant you wealth. And in return for bringing to
rest your deceased husbands, may each of you find rest in the house of her new
husband.”
Proper burial is an act of kindness that affords repose to the body and
peace to the soul, as it is written: “He will come in peace, they will
rest on their couches” (Isaiah 57:2).
Recall in this regard Jacob’s bitter lament—”A wild beast has devoured
him! Joseph has been torn apart!” (Genesis 37:33)—when he thought that Joseph
had died without burial.
And it is fitting that in return for properly burying the dead,
Ruth and Orpah would find personal tranquility in remarriage.
According to the Targum, Naomi said, “May God grant you wealth in the
full measure of your kindness. Your wealth will attract distinguished suitors,
and among them you will select husbands to make you happy.”
Naomi said, “God grant.” She wished them prosperity from the bounteous
hand of God rather than from the niggardly hands of mortals.
To Naomi’s words, “You will find rest, each in the house of her
husband,” our sages relate the teaching that a woman is never content except in
her husband’s home. The wealthy widow living in a palace and the pampered
daughter in her father’s house may enjoy material comfort. But only in her
husband and children does a woman find fulfillment and peace of mind.
In wishing them “rest, each in the house of her husband,” Naomi was also
praying that they have the peace and security of owning their own homes,
instead of living in rented dwellings together with their in-laws. For rarely
do a mother-in-law and daughter-in-law live peacefully under one roof as Naomi
had lived with Ruth and Orpah.
Another in Naomi’s position would have blamed her suffering on her
daughters-in-law. She, however, grieved over their suffering—their poverty,
their childlessness, and their widowhood. And she wholeheartedly prayed that
God would bless them with wealth, happy marriages, and children, and spare
them further tragedy.
“If your first marriages were ill-fated because my sons married you to
suit their whims,” she said to them, “may your second marriages be ordained by
God. You will then find contentment.”
Although our sages teach that first rather than second marriages are
ordained before birth, second marriages are decreed according to a person’s
deeds. And on account of their kindness “with the deceased and with me,” Naomi
assured them that their second marriages would be happy ones.
She prayed that her barren daughters-in-law would succeed in raising a
family—the mark of the mainstay of the home, as it is written: e sets up
the mainstay of the house; the mother of the children is happy” (Psalms 113:9).
At the mention of marriage, however, Ruth and Orpah recalled their dead
husbands, and they “raised their voice and wept.”
On another level of meaning, Naomi’s blessings were prophetic regarding
each of her daughters-in-law.
In the merit of the forty steps that Orpah had accompanied Naomi, her
descendant Goliath would be spared for forty days before being slain by David.
This is conveyed by the masculine form of “(to) you” (ofk rather than ifl).
The letter mem (o) corresponds to the
number forty.
Ruth would live to see her descendants David and Solomon sitting on the
throne of
This indicates, accordingly, that Ruth, who derived her [spiritual]
descent from
From Ruth and Boaz would descend Solomon, of whom God said, “He will be a man of rest, and I shall give him
rest from all his enemies around him.. He will build a House for My
name”(1Chronicles 22:9-10). And the Beit HaMikdash (
From Ruth and Boaz, too, would descend the Messiah. He will usher in an
era when the Jewish people will be gathered, never to be exiled again.
Moreover, it is indicated that since the
Ruth would be the mother of prophets as well as kings, and this, too, is
conveyed by the word “rest.” Thus our sages deduce from the verse, “Seraiah (v-h ra, prince of God), the prince of rest” (Jeremiah
51:59), that Baruch ben Neriyah attained prophecy.
Having blessed her daughters-in-law. “she kissed them,” just as Isaac
had kissed his son Jacob upon blessing him (Genesis 27:27). The kiss
symbolizes transfer of the blessing by binding together the souls of the one
giving and the one receiving the blessing.
Some authorities write that the kiss of a tzaddik awakens the soul of a
pure person from its slumber. But if the person is impure, the kiss draws the
sparks of holiness out of him, and he remains without a basis of existence.
After Naomi’s kiss, accordingly, “they raised their voice (singular) and wept.”
(They did not weep together, i.e., for the same reason; each wept separately.]
Ruth wept out of longing for God, Naomi’s kiss having aroused her desire to cleave
to Him. And Orpah wept over her downfall, for she realized that she had lost
her sparks of holiness.
VERSE 1:10
They said to her, “No, with you shall we return to your people.”
When Naomi kissed them farewell, Ruth and Orpah protested that they would
not forsake her, but “with you . .. return to your people.”
Although they had never been there, they spoke of returning to
“Although you prayed that God should deal kindly with us if we returned
to our mothers’ home, we trust He will treat us just as kindly if we come with
you.”
According to the Targum, they were replying to Naomi’s advice to “Go,
return each to her mother’s house” (v. 8). “No, we will not go back to
the idols of
Although Naomi had warned them that the life of a convert was full of
suffering and sadness, they nevertheless insisted on converting.
Their motivations, however, differed. Both Ruth and Orpah had “raised
their voice and wept” (v. 9), and both now said, “with you we will
return to your people.” But Orpah stressed the word l,t “with you”; her wish was to be with Naomi, and to
that end she was willing to convert; and Ruth said lngk “to your people.” Her primary motive was conversion
to Judaism; being with Naomi was secondary.
Furthermore, they insisted on going with Naomi because “with you we
shall return to your people.” That is, only from her could they receive the necessary instruction
preparatory to their conversion.
They also needed Naomi to testify to their sincerity. For if they were
suspected of converting because of Israel’s new prosperity they would be turned
away, as all would-be converts were later turned away during the golden age of
King Solomon.
VERSE 1:11
Naomi said, “Return, my daughters. Why go with me? Have I more sons in
my womb who might be husbands for you?”
Now that Ruth and Orpah had expressed a desire to convert, Naomi
tenderly called them “my daughters.” She tried to dissuade them, however,
suspecting that their desire to convert stemmed from love of her, not love of
God. And she pleaded that remaining with her was impossible. The bonds of
marriage which had united them were now dissolved by death and could not be
renewed, for she had no more sons to give them.
“Why go with me if you insist on converting? Go to a different city in
“Nor is it even advisable for you to go with me, if your intention
purely is to join the Jewish people. Go to
“Go back to
“And you cannot rely on me. Machlon and Kilyon are dead, my unborn child
is dead. Even if I were carrying sons now, after you will have grown old
waiting for them to come of age, they might not want to be your husbands.
“Nor could they be your husbands, according to Torah law.” Marrying a
brother’s widow is forbidden except in levirate marriage (yabum, ouch) for the sake of perpetuating the name of the
deceased through offspring. Since yibum applies, however, only ‘if brothers
dwell together’ (Deuteronomy 25:5), that is, if the two brothers were in this
world at the same time, a man born after his brother’s death is ineligible for
yibum, and forbidden to marry his brother’s widow.
Naomi therefore said that even if she had sons in her womb now, they could
not “be husbands for you.
VERSE 1:12
“Return, my daughters, go. For I am too old to have a husband. For were
I even to say there is hope for me or even if I were to have a husband tonight
and I also bore sons..
For the third time now, Naomi told her daughters-in-law to “return.” in
keeping with the teaching of our sages that a would-be convert should be turned
away three times. If he nevertheless persists, he is then accepted.
Rabbi Yitzchak expounded: A would-be convert is kept away with his left
hand and drawn near with the right, as it is written: “My door to the wayfarer
I will open; outside a stranger shall not sleep” (Job 31:32). That is, I
do not open my door to a stranger—a gentile who comes to convert—as readily as
to a wayfarer; but if the stranger persists in knocking, I will not close the
door to him.
“If we could all continue to live together,” she now urged, “it would be
reasonable for you to come with me. But why do so, when ultimately you must
marry out of the family and leave me?”
Naomi again called them “my daughters.” She felt towards them like a
mother who is anxious to see her widowed daughters find husbands, not like a
mother-in-law who is angry if her sons’ widows remarry.
It was inevitable that they would marry out of the family, she said. She
had no other sons for them to marry; “I am too old to have a husband” and bear
more children. And it was ludicrous to imagine that in the
“Even if I were to become young again,” she pursued, “and I married this
very night and bore sons, why should you languish in widowhood waiting for them
to reach marriageable age?”
According to the opinion that Ruth and Orpah had not converted before
marrying Machlon and Kilyon, they could marry Naomi’s future sons, as their
first marriages were then void by Torah law and the prohibition of marrying a
brother’s widow would not apply.
It is significant and prophetic that Naomi said, “Return . . .
go.” For one would in fact return to
VERSE 1:13
“Would you wait for them until
they are grown? Would you shut yourselves off for them and have no husbands?
No, my daughters, for I am very bitter for you [alt: I am more bitter than
you]. For the hand of God has gone out against me.
“If you are coming with me in the hope of marrying sons I may yet bear,
turn back. For even if you are willing to remain widows until they are of age
to marry, by then you will be far too old, and they will not marry you.
Besides, ever since Abraham married Sarah, men have married younger women.”
By her use of the feminine form (ivk
instead of ovk), Naomi further
reminded them that even if she did bear children, they might, after all, be
girls.
Ruth and Orpah might, however, be content to remain widows out of
respect to their dead husbands, so she pleaded against it. “I am bitter enough
over your past misfortunes. Do not add to my grief by living the rest of your
lives in the miseries of widowhood.
“If I myself refuse to remarry, it is because I am broken over
the loss of my whole family and all my possessions. My suffering is far more
bitter than yours. ‘There is no soundness in my flesh because of God’s anger;
there is no health in my bones because of my sin’ (Psalms 38:4). But you are
still youthful and vigorous, and can still recover what you have lost.”
Naomi thus assured her daughters-in-law that she was not sending them
away because she blamed them for her sons’ deaths. She blamed only her sins for
her misfortunes. Just as Jeremiah was later to proclaim, ‘The crown is fallen
from our heads; woe to us for we have sinned” (Jeremiah 5:16), Naomi
declared: “The hand of God has gone out against me.”
This also indicates that her sons had died of the pestilence, the plague
the Egyptians called “the hand of God” (Exodus 9:3). Remarkably,
although the disease is extremely contagious, it was restricted to her
family alone—clear evidence that it was a divine punishment.
Indeed, her suffering had “gone out” of the ordinary. She was smitten
not by the finger of God but by His hand, five blows in all: the deaths of her
husband, her two sons, and the unborn child, and her extreme destitution. So
much misfortune could be due only to her sins.
“By being with me, you, too, have suffered because of the hand of God
that has stricken me,” said Naomi. “Therefore leave me and go back to
VERSE 1:14
1:14 They raised their voice and wept again. Orpah kissed her
mother-in-law, but Ruth cleaved to her.
When Naomi first urged them to return to
Naomi’s moving plea (vs. 12-13), full of love and concern for
their welfare, evoked fresh tears, and “they raised their voice and wept
again.”
[The singular form (“voice”) is significant.] Only Ruth’s weeping came
from the depths of her being. Orpah’s weeping was patently superficial, for she
“kissed her mother-in-law” and left. This time (compare v. 9), she did not even
wait for a parting kiss from Naomi. This too is conveyed in the incomplete
spelling of vba,u.
Our sages infer that nevertheless, in the merit of the four tears she
had shed—[hinted at by the four words (sug vbhfc,u ikue vba,u) that describe the weeping]-four mighty warriors
would descend from her. Thus it is written, “These four were born to Harafah in
Gat” (2 Samuel 21:22), namely Saf, Madon (Lahmi), Goliath, and Yishbi
(ibid: 16, 18, 19, 20, 1 Chronicles 20ff.).
Ruth truly wept and clung to Naomi out of love. Thus the women of
Our sages declare: Let the sons of Orpah, who kissed Naomi, fall by the
hands of the sons of Ruth, who cleaved to her. And generations after the two
sisters-in-law parted ways, the four warriors who came from Orpah were slain by
Ruth’s great-grandson David and his men (1 Chronicles 20ff.).
VERSE 1:15
1:15 She said, “Behold, your sister-in-law has returned to her people
and to her gods; return after your sister-in-law.”
Both Ruth and Orpah had declared their intention to convert.
Nevertheless, after Naomi told them that she could not arrange for them to
marry distinguished men suitable for a king’s daughters, Orpah left. In a final
test of Ruth’s determination to convert, Naomi now told her to follow Orpah’s
example and go back to
“Your sister-in-law came this far
out of courtesy and because she was ashamed to leave me,” said Naomi, “but now
she has returned home. You are also free to depart. Do not feel obligated to
remain because Orpah has left.”
Another interpretation is that Naomi, thinking she succeeded in
persuading Ruth to leave, urged her to hurry and catch up with Orpah (“return
after your sister-in-law”), so the two could travel together.
Although Orpah had but returned “to her people,” Naomi knew that under
their influence she would also return “to her gods.” In this regard, the
influence of the environment is already noted in the Torah, which warns: “they
[idolators] shall not dwell in your midst lest they cause you to sin against
Me” (Exodus 23:33).
One who encourages a Jew to worship idols incurs the death penalty. If
therefore Naomi told Ruth to return after her sister-in-law who “has returned
to her gods,” evidently Ruth had not yet converted. Or else, Ruth and Orpah had
converted to marry Machlon and Kilyon, but invalidated the conversion by
secretly continuing to worship idols.
However, Naomi spoke as she did in order to test Ruth, and she chose her
words carefully. She did not actually say, “return to your gods,” but “return
after your sister-in-law.” She accepted Ruth’s sincerity of faith, and only
urged her to go back to her father’s house in Orpah’s company.
VERSE 1:16
1:16 But Ruth said: “Entreat me not to leave you, to return from
following after you. Where you go, I will go, and where you lodge, I will lodge;
your people are my people, and your God is my God.”
When urged to follow the example of Orpah, who returned “to her people
and to her gods,” Ruth countered: “Your people are my people, and your God is
my God.”
Naomi had also advised her to return to her mother’s house or go to
The expression hgdp, can also mean strike
a blow, and thus Ruth conveyed to Naomi that she was stung by the insinuation
that she was only accompanying her out of politeness. “In coming with you I
have no ulterior motive, not even to collect my marriage settlement in
“Your sharp words will not turn me away. Even if you tell me black is
white, I will follow you and obey you.
“Nor can you frighten me away by implying that the hand of God that has
gone out against you may also strike me if I cleave to you.
“Even if I remarry, I will not leave you. Nothing, not the land, nor
differences of nationality, religion, or custom, will separate me from you.
“You wished us to find rest in the houses of our husbands, but I am not
looking for peace and security; I would rather be a wanderer casting about for
my lodging with you, than live in the palace of a king.
“And if you do not let me come with you, I will go alone to
Leaving Naomi was for Ruth like forsaking the Torah; by the seemingly
redundant phrase, “to return from following after you,” she indicated that with
every step she might take away from Naomi, the distance between them would
double. Similarly our sages teach: When a person departs from the Torah, the
Torah departs from him, hence doubling the separation between them.
Naomi had instructed her in the commandments, and Ruth now committed
herself to fulfill them. “Your people are my people” was her acceptance of the
laws between man and his fellow; “your God is my God” relates to the laws
between man and God.
Our sages expound: “Your people are my people”— these are punishments
and warnings [of the Torah which Ruth now accepted as binding]. “Your God is my
God”— these are the other precepts.
Another implication: “Your people are my people” who will take me away
from idolatry; “your God is my God” who will reward me for my labor. Ruth thus
expressed her belief in reward and punishment.
Naomi instructed her with particular care in the laws of the Sabbath,
for Sabbath observance unequivocally attests to belief in God as Creator. And
our sages wrote that despite their desire to reach
Naomi also taught her the code of Torah morality, including the
prohibition of yichud (sujh), seclusion with
men. And this Ruth accepted: “Where you lodge, I will lodge.”
According to our sages, when Naomi said to her: “We are commanded to
fulfill six-hundred and thirteen precepts,” Ruth replied:
“Your people are my people.”
“We are forbidden to worship idols.”
“Your God is my God.”
“My daughter, a Jew does not reside in a house that lacks a mezuzah.”
“Where you lodge, I will lodge.”
“Jewish maidens do not frequent pagan circuses and theaters.”
“Where you go, I will go.”
Ruth understood Naomi’s hesitation to take her to
VERSE 1:17
1:17 “Where you die, I will die; and there I will be buried. Thus may
God do to me, and more, for death will separate me from you.”
“I cannot bear to be without you. The moment you die, I will die. And
may God deal severely with me if I permit anything but death to separate me
from you.”
Realizing that it was unlikely that any man in
“Death will separate me from you,” she insisted, “but not my place of
burial.” Since, however, it was not within her power to determine when and
where she would die and be buried, Ruth prayed that God grant that she remain
free of sin and thus worthy of dying in the same place as Naomi, and hence be
buried next to her.
Moreover, she prayed that her death and burial be in the
Then, realizing that she had spoken of Naomi’s death before her own
(“Where you die, I will die”), Ruth quickly corrected herself by adding, “Thus
may God do to me ... for death will separate me from you,” mentioning
her own death first.
According to the Midrash, Naomi had warned Ruth that one who accepts the
Torah is liable for transgressions and subject to the four types of capital
punishment. And Ruth replied: “In whatever way you die, I will die,” expressing
her acceptance of the Torah along with its specific punishments.
Then she added “may God do to me”- a prayer that she die a natural death
rather than incur the death penalty for her sins.
According to our sages, “for death will separate me from you” also
alludes to the teaching Ruth absorbed from her mother-in-law regarding life’s
purpose in this world: to fulfill as many mitzvoth as possible and accumulate
good deeds for which one is rewarded in the World to Come. [She would strive
for this by becoming a Jew and cleaving to Naomi.] In the hereafter, on the
other hand, they will be “separate.” For the souls of the righteous are
uniquely rewarded in the World to Come, “each occupying a different abode”
(Talmud).
The contrary is true of the gentiles who worship idols, whom death does
not set apart. [Since they do not acknowledge the one true God, the source of
all distinctions and differences in the world, the difference between living
and non-living is denied]. “In life they are all as dead, and in death they are
not separate” (Daily Prayer).
Accordingly, Ruth said: “Death will separate me from you,” affirming
her belief in life after death.
Moreover, vf rcet conveys her belief in
the resurrection of the dead. The last four letters spell vfrc blessing, which is an allusion to resurrection. Thus
it is written, “For there has the Lord commanded the blessing (vfrc)—eternal life” (Psalms 133:3).
Ruth said, “Thus may God do to me.” She prayed that the blessing Naomi
had given her daughters-in-law (“May the Lord deal kindly ..“—v. 8) should be
fulfilled through her alone, now that Orpah returned to her gods. And more—may
He add to this blessing (“find rest in the house of her husband”—v. 9) so that
from her marriage will come forth the royal dynasty.
VERSE 1:18
1:18 When she saw that she strove to go with her, she ceased speaking to
her.
Naomi saw that the more she tried to dissuade Ruth from convert- ing,
the more resolute Ruth became. When she first said "Go, return" (v.
8), Ruth had replied, "With you we shall return to your people" (v.
10). And then instead of yielding to Naomi's persistent urging to the con-
trary, Ruth declared: "Where you go, I will go ...where you die, I will
die" (vs. 16, 17). Her words had the opposite effect she intended, and so
Naomi ceased speaking.
In accordance with the teaching of our sages that a would-be convert is
rejected with the left hand and befriended with the right, Naomi had tried to
deter Ruth by instructing her in the penalties incurred for trans- gression of
Torah precepts; and when Ruth embraced the Torah way nonetheless, she
encouraged her by speaking of the reward of the righteous in the World to Come.
Then "she ceased speaking to her," lest this would-be convert should
be [encouraged or] discouraged excessively.
A further reason was that Naomi "saw" Ruth was trying to gain
strength and ease her isolation by cleaving to her.
Another interpretation sees Ruth, not Naomi, as the subject of the
verse. When Ruth saw that Naomi was determined to thrust her away, and fearing
that she might be swayed, she stopped talking and began to walk alone toward
Ruth's perseverence is without parallel. Nowhere else does the Scripture
use the term ,mnt,n, for no other
proselyte ever "strove" so tenaciously to cling to the Shechinah (Divine
Presence).
Resh Lakish, then leader of a robber band, once leaped across the
Moreover, this indicates that since Ruth was on the way to join a
strange people, she had to struggle to keep pace with Naomi, who was returning
home, even if laden with misfortune.
In return for her efforts, God strengthened Ruth as He strengthened all
those who struggle to be righteous, as it is written: “He that has pure hands
grows stronger and stronger” (Job 17:9)
Abraham Ibn Ezra
1:6 AND SHE RETURNED FROM THE FIELD
OF MOAB: The verb expresses intention, as in ‘And Israel began to fight with
Balaq’.
1:8 WITH THE DEAD: These are her
sons.
1:9 MAY THE LORD GRANT YOU: A
husband.
1:11 HAVE I YET SONS?: Many of our colleagues
have thought that this is an argument against those who deny, but they did not
know that our fathers limited the duty of levirate marriage to brothers who
have the same father, and not to those who have the same mother only. She said
to them, “If there were sons in my womb, I would have given them to you instead
of the dead”. But this would have been done out of love and not as levirate
marriage.
1:13 WOULD YOU WAIT FOR THEM?: The nun (in ivkv) is instead of men. The converse is found in VERY BITTER
TO ME ON ACCOUNT OF YOU (ofn), and in THEY (vnv) CAME TO BETHLEHEM. The word vbrca, means ‘attachment’ when used with the letter lamedh or with the word ‘l, as in ‘urcah fhkkf hbh
vbd, belongs to the niphal conjugation, and there is no
other example of the verb.
NOT TO BELONG TO A
MAN: That is, each one of them to her own man, as in ‘the two of them were
hanged on a tree
NO, MY DAUGHTERS: That is to say, ‘Do not go with me
FOR THERE HAS GONE OUT AGAINST ME: The decree of God which goes out from
his presence or which has been delivered and has gone out against me until it
has been seen.
THE HAND OF THE LORD: This means ‘a blow’, for in using the word ‘hand’
the text is speaking metaphorically.
1:15 YOUR SISTER—IN—LAW HAS GONE
BACK: The declension of ‘sister—in—law’ we have already explained in the Torah.15
TO HER PEOPLE AND HER GODS: This shows that they had been converted to
Judaism.
1:16 DO NOT ENTREAT ME: The meaning
of dp’ is persuasion,
and the preposition c is always found with it, as in ‘Entreat Ephron for
me’. It is not a strange word, except far the occurrence with the meaning ‘I
will spare no man’, and I will explain this in that place.
YOUR PEOPLE SHALL BE MY PEOPLE: I will never forsake the Torah of Israel
and the declaration of the unity of God’.
1:18 tan,n: Hithpael conjugation.
Malbim
6-7. Question: Why does the text appear to repeat itself, saying: she...arose...[to]
return, she left the place, and they went on the road to return?
6. She then arose, with her daughters-in-law. All three of them
resolved to leave because they thought that their misfortune was the result of
residing in that place. As such, in terms of their decision to leave
For she heard in the field of
7. She left the place where she was [living], with her two
daughters-in-law. The Prophet now elucidates the previous verse in that,
relevant to their leaving, all three of them were in agreement about departing
immediately from their ill-fated location. However, regarding Naomi's decision
to return to the
They went on the road. Only after making the journey to a border of the
8. Naomi then said. Naomi thought in the beginning that their
going with her on the road to the
9. May the ETERNAL grant. Besides that which HaShem should bestow
upon you in accordance with your munificence, may He give you a gift (something
which is not a reward for a previous deed) that each find contentment in her
husband's home. This corresponds to what Naomi had said: Return, each to
[your] mother's house. For it was customary in those times that a widow who
did not desire to remarry would take up separate residence as a statement of
her self-determination and independence. But a widow who desired to remarry
would go back to her father's house, or in the case of non-Jews (who do not
have the status of genealogical descent from the father[3]), to her mother's
house until she would be wed. In this regard, Naomi blessed them, that each
find contentment in her husband's home; that they suffer no more
bereavement or grief; and that they encounter only a delightful sense of
security which is truly the gift of HaShem.
She then kissed them. A kiss of separation and farewell.
10. They said to her. At this point they revealed to her that
their intention was not just to accompany Naomi until the
11. Naomi answered [them]. To this Naomi advised, Return, my
daughters. Why do you [wish to] go with me? By this she meant that her
people would not marry them and it was a vain hope for Naomi once again to
provide them with spouses: Do I have any more sons in my womb {who] could
become your husbands? It has already been explained (HaTorah
v'HaMitzvah, Parashas Tazria, Note 4) that the literal usage of the noun sons
applies only to children already born, not those still in their mother's
womb. If so, how could Naomi say, Do I have any more sons in my womb? Obviously;
Naomi was speaking ironically. First she intimated, Do I have any more sons old
enough to marry you right away? Then, to exaggerate even more, Naomi contended,
"Do I have sons old enough for you to wed, and do I conceal them in my
womb -who might propose to you today!?" Surely this verse should be
understood as clearly an exaggeration. For no one could seriously suggest that
Orpah and Ruth would be willing to wait for Naomi to marry, have children, and
raise them to a marriageable age. By then, Orpah and Ruth would be much older
and thus inappropriate as brides for men so many years younger than themselves.
12. Return. Naomi adds a second rationale for them not to
continue with her: Even if one could possibly entertain the notion that you
would be willing to wait...there are two problems: [1 for I am too old to marry a man, and
[2] would you wait...until they grow up. The Midrash Ruth Rabbah (2:17)
comments, Even it.., if I were to have a husband tonight, could I have
children? The Midrash explains the verses this way, according to the Talmudic
dictum (Yevamos 34b), " A woman who remains a widow for ten years
will no longer bear children." The Talmud asks, "Was not the daughter
of Rav Chisda a widow for ten years before she remarried and had children?"
The Talmud replies that she always hoped to remarry and, under that condition,
she could still have children even after ten years. If so, it says here, Elimelech...died...and
they lived there about ten years. As such, Naomi was a widow for ten years
and it was only possible for her to have more children under one of two
conditions: [1] if during the period of her widowhood she did not despair of
remarrying, she would be able to give birth even after ten years; or [2] if she
did not intend to remarry, only if she would wed tonight -the last night of the
ten years. According to this, Naomi said, Return, my daughters, go [marry],
for I am too old to marry a man, a widow after ten years can no longer bear
children to her spouse. Only if she had maintained, there is hope for me that
during the entire ten years she had never despaired of remarrying and always
said...There is hope for me, would she be able to give birth even after
ten years. And, even if I were to have a husband tonight, only if I
would wed tonight the last night of the ten years -could I still have children?
Therefore, I ask you, Would you wait?
13. Would you wait. The definition of tesaberna (vbrca,), waiting, is the hope for something distinct which
logic dictates will be fulfilled in its appropriate time; as it says, His
hope is in HaShem, his Lord (Tehillim 146:5); On the day the enemies of
the Jews hoped to gain the upper hand over them (Megillas Esther 9:1); and The
eyes of all look to You with hope and You give them their food in its proper
time (Tehillim 145:15). Naomi admonished her daughters-in-law that, even if
sons were born, could you be sure they would grow up? Perhaps they would die in
their adolescence! And, even if they would mature, would you tie yourselves
down for them and not marry anyone else? No, my daughters! The Midrash
Ruth Rabbah (2:17) interprets the word Al ('II) as in, Woe like
unto a virgin (Yoel1:8) and, Woe unto me (Michah 7:1), meaning woe unto
me even more than for you!
For the ETERNAL's [plague] has affected me [literally, ...the
hand of the ETERNAL has gone forth against me]. The hand of HaShem, which
normally connotes a blow or plague, is not found in Tanach together with
the words gone forth (vtmh) but rather with the
words it was (v,hv): Your hand was
against me (Shemuel II, 24:17); The hand of HaShem was against them
(Shofetim 2:15). The language gone forth used here indicates that
HaShem had already expended all of His chastisements against her and would not
visit any more punishment upon her. On this, the Midrash Ruth Rabbah (2:17)
remarks: gone forth against me -against me, my children, and my husband. Naomi's
message was that HaShem had punished her completely, but regarding Orpah
and Ruth, HaShem's hand was against them but had not yet gone forth (implying
that their continued relationship with Naomi might still bring them
misfortune).
14. Orpah then kissed her mother-in-law. A kiss of separation,
because she had intended to accompany Naomi only to the extent that it was
"beneficial" to her. Whereas, Ruth, whose purpose in going with Naomi
was for the " good"[4] , clung to her.
15. Look! Your sister-in-law has returned. By this she meant to
say that since she returned to her people, most likely she returned also to her
god (Midrash Ruth Rabbah 2:21), implying that she had not intended to
convert. Naomi insinuated, "You probably are of a like mind and, if so,
accompany your sister-in-law ."
16. Do not press me. The Midrash Ruth Rabbah (2:22)
interprets her words in the following way: Ruth said to her, "Do not sin
against me! You will not receive your beseechment from me!" This is based
on the idea that the word hgdp, (urge) has three
possible meanings: striking, as it says, And he struck him and he died
(Melachim 1,2:25); meeting, And he met [came across]
To leave you, to turn back from following you. Ruth said, "1
will not leave you because I do not wish to part with you or to turn back from
you! Even if I would have to withdraw from you, I would not go back to the
For where you go, I will go. Ruth declared, "Do not think
that the purpose of my going is different from your own: you are going
there for the sake of your religion -so that you will be able to keep the
commandments which are dependent on the soil (that is, of the Land of Israel),
as well as the rest of the Torah and its commandments; however, you think I go
only for the sake of some benefit...not so! My purpose is identical to
yours." Likewise, "Do not think that I hope to achieve some temporal
advantage such as marrying a wealthy man, etc."
Where you sleep, I will sleep. "I will reside as a
foreigner in the Land just like the righteous who reside in this world as a
place of temporary dwelling:' The motivation of my odyssey is: your people
is my people, and your God is my God. "I have already embraced the Torah of your
God and the customs of your people and recognize myself as one of your
nation."
17. Where you die, I will die. Ruth expressed, "My ultimate
desire in going is to die the death of the righteous just like you, in which
the spirit returns to the Rock of life."
And there I will be buried. "In the same place in the
Let the ETERNAL treat me like this. Ruth swore that this indeed was her genuine
intention.
If anything but death separates between me and you. Ruth stated, "My
reason for accompanying you is because I understand that death will create a
great divide between us. In life, I have clung to you. Even though our
religions separated us, we were united by virtue of our mutual love. However,
after our death, we will be separated because you will be linked with the Lord
of Hosts but I will be banished to the realm of the idolaters. Therefore, I
plead with you that I may convert so that we not part in death!" By these
words (verses 16 and 17) Ruth revealed that she had already accepted the major
tenets of Judaism: the existence of HaShem and His Oneness (as she said, your-God
is my God), the uniqueness of Torah and its customs (for where you go, I
will go: meaning that I will go in the path of the upright and the
Torah, your people is my people) and the eternity of the soul, reward
and punishment in the World to Come, and the resurrection of the dead (Where
you die, I will die, and there I will be buried). Our Sages (Yevamos
47b) explained that Ruth also embraced the practical commandments (as she
said, for where you go -on Shabbos -I will go, etc.). The Midrash
Ruth Rabbah (2:25) comments that Naomi implored Ruth, "Whatever
commandments and good deeds you can accomplish, do so now in this world,
because death separates between me and you!"
18. [Naomi] saw. Once Naomi perceived that Ruth wanted to convert
wholeheartedly (because the word ,mnt,n connotes the persistent strengthening of the heart) she desisted from
dissuading her, in accordance with the precepts of conversion.[5]
Alshich
(i)
Looking first at the beginning of verse 6, why is it necessary to write that
she arose? Isn’t it enough to say that she and her daughters-in-law
returned? What did she ‘rise’ from?
(ii)The
singular form oe,u, she arose, is employed in place of the more correct unue,u, and they arose, the
subjects being Na’omi and her daughters-in-law. Similarly, ca,u
she returned, should be ucua,u and they returned,
as all three came to the
For the
same reason we find in Genesis 24:8: “Take care not to bring my son back
there.” The reference is to Isaac, who had never been to
(iii)ln
verse 6 the word ca,u, she returned, is in the past tense. The next verse seems to go
back in time: She left the place... and set out on the road!
(iv)
In verse 6 there are two apparently contradictory phrases: the fields’ of
Moob (ctun hsa) in the plural
and the ‘field’ of
(v)The
prophet seems to speak derisively of Na’omi by indicating that the only reason for
her return was that she heard that there was now food to be had in
(vi) In verse 7, we read: She left the place... In order
to arrive in
(vii) They
set out on the road... To reach any destination, one has to ‘set out on the
road’! Furthermore, why does the prophet wait until now to inform us that they
were returning to
Why Was Na’omi in a Rush to Leave?
In these
verses, Sripture highlights the wisdom of Na’omi. She did not take the time to
bid a tearful farewell to her daughters-in-law as other women would do. It
would have been quite normal to have consoled them about her imminent departure
by saying: “I must return to my country and my people. It is very difficult for
me to do this, for you both know how much I love you. But now the time has come
to go our separate ways; you must return to your mother’s house.”
The
prophet takes pains to tell us: She then arose. Immediately after the
death of her two sons she made preparations for the trip. Wisely, she realized
that if she were to tarry and make a grand farewell party, they would no doubt
persuade her to remain by claiming that they needed her guidance, and that they
would be better to her than even ten sons. They would most likely have told
her: “We do not dare leave the confines of your protective influence. Just as
an eagle stirs up her nest, so will you hover over us (cf. Deuteronomy 32:11).
Is it worth it for you to be treated with contempt by the distinguished members
of your people when you were once esteemed as one of the nobles and leaders of
the land? How will it be
when they see you again — those who had once
extolled your honor and the honor of your husband? They will surely exclaim:
‘Is this really that woman?’ They will whistle in disbelief and spit at you
with contempt!”
Such
strong words would no doubt have left their mark on Na’omi, and in this way her
daughters-in-law might have persuaded her to stay in
With this
we can understand why the verse speaks only of Na’omi arising to leave. Only
once she had left did her daughters-in-law follow suit. Similarly, ca,u, And (she) returned, is in the singular,
for at that time only Na’omi was intending to return. The others did not know
where she was going.
This also
explains why the past tense is employed. The Divine Spirit is reminding us of
one of God’s greatest kindnesses to His people,
The
above-mentioned Talmudic dictum applies only to a Jew. Hence, in the following
verse we read: And ‘they’ set out on the road to return. They includes
Ruth and Orpah, who were gentiles, and their intention to return was not
combined with an action (
Were Her Motives
Pure?
One may
be inclined to judge Na’omi unfavorably on two accounts: (1) She realized that
she was not succeeding in her present surroundings and therefore wished to move
to a new locality where her luck might change, following the advice of our
Sages (Talmud Bava Metzia 75b): “One who is badly off in one place should seek
his fortune elsewhere.” (2) She feared that she would die like her husband and
sons for settling in a foreign land.
One could
argue that these realizations prompted her to return to
To Leave and Never to
Return
To refute
these arguments and to show that her intentions were pure and holy, Scripture
informs us that she returned from the fields of
For
she had heard, while in
Why
Did SheWait Until the Famine Was Over?
Na’omi
understood that if she were to return during a famine, while she herself was
poor and suffering from hunger and thirst, the people there would find reason
to rebuke her: “When you had plenty of food and lived comfortably, then you
were worried that you might have to share your wealth with the poor and you
would have too many mouths to feed. Thus, you fled to avoid helping the hungry
(cf. Midrash Ruth Rabbah 1:4). What right have you to come begging to us when
you find yourself in distress so that we should sustain you?”
To avoid
such a confrontation, Na’omi did not return until she had heard that the famine
was over. Then she would have been able to survive by the work of her own hands
or from alms that were given generously to the poor once the famine was over.
That
God had remembered His people. The point being made here is that God remembered His
people and not His land. This is in contrast to the times of Joel about which
it was written: And God was jealous for His ‘land’ and had pity on His
people (Joel 2:18).
Though
Na’omi would not have remained outside
It can be
implied further that she did not wait until they were actually provided with
bread. As soon as she heard that God had remembered them with the intention of
relieving the suffering there, she immediately made plans to leave. This in
fact is quite a common occurrence. After a famine has lasted for a few years,
God blesses the land so that the seeds germinate quickly and the crops grow.
The people can see that God has remembered them even though the produce is not
ripe for reaping. They see the blessing before they actually have food. Na’omi
heard that they had been blessed and that a bountiful crop was in the offing,
so she immediately set out on her way. Proof of this is shown later when we
read that they came to
We will now discuss verse 7 in more detail:
Na’omi Was Hesitant to Return to
Na’omi’s original intention was not to return to Bethlehem, where she
would most likely feel the shame and disgrace of her poverty by having to face
all those who knew her and who would recall the days of her former glory.
Consequently, she did not make plans to return to her hometown but just to the
She
returned…for she had heard. Her intention was imply to return to
Hence, the meaning of the verse is this: She had left the town where she
had resided, but her daughters-in-law were still following along with her. She
then understood that they intended to accompany her all the way to
As a
result of this, Na’omi changed her mind and decided to go to
Alternatively,
she did not reveal her destination to them. She left suddenly, and they
accompanied her, unaware of her intentions. There is no doubt that originally
they had planned only to escort her, for they had an attachment to her. But it
was Na’omi alone who elected to leave
Once they
had left the city behind and were well on their way, Na’omi revealed her plan
to them, and it is then that the daughters-in-law decided to accompany her all
the way, especially after she had explained her reasons for leaving. Thus, the
prophet now adds, They set out on the road to return to the
(8) And Na’omi said to her two daughters-in-law, “Go back, return each
of you to her mother’s house. May God deal kindly with you as you dealt with
the dead and with me.”
(9)”May God grant that you find peace, each one in your husband’s home.”
She kissed them and they cried loudly.
Looking closely at these two verses, there are many difficulties which
demand explanation.
(i) Why is there a need
to emphasize that there were two daughters-in-law if we are well aware
of that fact already?
(ii) In verse 8 she tells
them: Go back, return, yet later in verse 12 she telis them, return alone.
This is further complicated when we note that in verse 11 the order is
reversed: return, go back!
(iii) It seems strange that
she asked them to return to their mothers’ home’s instead of to their fathers’
homes which is the norm, as we find in Leviticus 22:13: And she shall
return to her father’s house...
(iv) In verse 8 she urges them
to return, each of them, to her mother’s house but in verse 9 she blesses
each of them that she finds peace in her husband’s home!
(v) A further contradiction:
In verse 8 her blessing is that hj agh May God deal..., while in verse 9 it is hj i,h, May God give...
(vi) Why is the letter v in the word vagh silent? (It is read as agh.)
(vii) The word ofng with you, is in the masculine instead of the feminine
form ifng Similarly, in verse 9, ofk, to you, should
be ifk.
(viii) The clause hufu o,hag
ratf as you have done..., should have been inserted
after the second blessing in verse 9 and not between the two blessings.
(ix) In the word itmnu (and you shall
find) the letter v is missing, as the
correct word in this instance is vbtmnu.
(x)Why did Na’omi kiss them? For the moment, even Orpah had not made the
decision to turn back, so it could not have been a farewell kiss.
Na’omi did not want to appear in a hurry to convert them, as she did not
want Judaism to seem cheap in their eyes. On the contrary, any gentile wishing
to convert must first be gently dissuaded. Na’omi might have asked: “What is so
attractive about Judaism that makes you want to join the Jewish people?” She
made it seem obvious that she was expecting them to return and that she thought
they had come only to see her off on her journey.
Why Not ‘Father’s
House’?
Na’omi told her daughters-in-law, “Go, return! Had you both
converted to Judaism, it would have been out of place to return to your
fathers’ houses, for once converted, you are no longer part of the family” — as our Sages say
(Talmud Yebamoth 22a): “One who becomes a proselyte is like a newly born
child.” “How could you be expected to return to your parents’ homes once you
are Jewish if you are no longer related to them? Besides, the atmosphere in
such a house would prove to be alien to your new beliefs. Thus, even if you
return, it would only be ‘to the town,’ for you would have no parents or
siblings to turn to. Since you have not converted, there is no reason
why you cannot both return to your mother’s house, br you still belong
to your respective families.”
Na’omi deliberately used the term mother’s house and not father’s
house, (or she wished lo show her distaste for male Moabites, who had been
excluded by God from marrying into the Jewish people. A Moabitess, however, is
permitted to marry a Jew (Talmud Yebamoth 69a).
There may be another reason why a father’s house is not mentioned. It is
based on two factors which made it difficult for the sisters-in-law to part
from Na’omi. First of all, she had been like a mother to them. Secondly, if she
left them, they would be like trees that have shed their leaves. Each of them
would return to her mother’s home lonesome and dejected with little appetite
for food. They would feel like birds wandering to and fro, seeking tidbits.
Even if their father were to provide them with sustenance, it would be ‘the
bread of affliction.’ Instead of being treated like princesses in their
husbands’ homes, they would be overcome with misery. They would feel as if they
were relying on someone else’s charity even if they were in their own homes.
The neighbors would no doubt reproach them by saying: “This is your reward for
leaving your own people to marry Hebrews. You deserve no better than this.”
Na’omi had all this in mind, and she wisely knew exactly how to arrange
her words to put the girls at ease.
Regarding the first factor she says: “True, I treated you like my very
own daughters, but surely the mothers who bore you will treat you many times
better than I. For this reason she stresses mother’s house instead of
‘father’s house,’ as only a real mother can take her place.
As to the second reason for their reluctance to return, Na’omi adds:
“There is no purpose in feeling like beggars. God does not withhold the reward
of any creature (cf. Talmud Pesachim 118a). I am certain that God will deal
kindly with you and ensure that you will not have to rely solely on your
mothers for survival.”
A Reward for Her
Kindnesses
As you dealt with the dead and with me. The Midrash (Ruth Rabbah
2:13) relates that Ruth and Orpah prepared the burial shrouds of their husbands
and relinquished their claims to the entitlements that were due to them upon
their husbands’ deaths in favor of their mother-in-law — a most pious and charitable
act. Thus, they had dealt kindly with the dead.
“On account of this,” said Na’omi, “God will surely deal equally kindly
with you. He alone will reward you and care for you; you will not need to be
blessed by me. However, I request of God that He grant you a gift that is
greater than the reward you have earned: you should find peace and tranquility,
each woman in her husband’s home.” As the Midrash says (Ruth Rabbah 2:15), “A
woman can find happiness only in her husband’s home.’’
All in all, Na’omi wished two things for them. Firstly, she wished that
they find happiness by remarrying rather than having to remain in their
mothers’ houses. Secondly, since no pleasure or tranquility is complete unless
it can be shared with the companion of one’s youth, as our Sages say (Talmud
Sanhedrin 22b), “A woman only concludes a covenant with one who transforms her
from a shapeless lump into a useful vessel.”
Na’omi asked of God that they be granted a privilege not often enjoyed
by other women. She asked that they be happy and content in the homes of their
second husbands, even though these men would not “transform them into vessels.”
In order that they should not suffer humiliation when separating from
her, she kissed them as if she were bidding them farewell. Later, when they
told her they wished to convert, she did not kiss them, as it might appear that
she was rejecting them by kissing them goodbye. Instead, she pushed them away
lightly as if with her ‘left hand’ while bringing them closer to her with her ‘right
hand.’ In fact, we see later that it was Orpah who took leave of Na’omi by
kissing her (verse 14). Nowhere is it recorded that Na’omi kissed Orpah.
There is another further way to understand these verses. First it is
necessary to quote from the writings of our Sages.
In the Merit of Na
‘omi
Na’omi was known to be a great and righteous woman. Her name, hngb is derived from the word ogb, which means ‘pleasing,’ for her actions pleased
everyone (Ruth Rabbah 2:5). She told Ruth: “You need not fear suffering
embarrassment by lying at the feet of Boaz, as my merit will accompany you.”
Thus we read, Then go down to the threshing floor (3:3). The keri
is irdv ,srhu. However, the kethib
has h,srhu in the first person,
as if to say: “my merit will go with you” (Ruth Rabbah 5:12). Na’omi must have
known that her merit was great; otherwise, she would never have made such a
promise.
Na’omi was blessed with Divine intuition. The Midrash (Ruth Rabbah 2:15)
relates that she knew that a certain ‘good dove’ was due to emerge from Moab in
the merit of Lot’s daughter, whose intentions were entirely for Heaven’s sake,
and that consequently, the Royal House of David would be descended from her.
Moreover, we learn that even as
Which ‘Dove’ Was
Blessed?
Na’omi said: May God grant you. In the Midrash (Ruth Rabbah
2:15), R. Yose says on this verse: “All the benefits and the consolations that
God would offer to Solomon — as it is written, And God gave wisdom to Solomon
— will derive from you.
Na’omi was aware that a ‘dove’ was to emerge from
Na’omi’s words contain a great deal more than is obvious at first. Our
Sages[8] have revealed that
her words, May God deal kindly with you, refer to conversion. Thus, they
maintain that the Hebrew (v)agh has a silent v
to signify that a proselyte undergoes many tribulations and much suffering.
They further revealed to us (Ruth Rabbah 2:15) that the words God will
grant you refer to the
Now we can explain the verse in more detail.
Go, return. The meaning is as follows: “Go to your homes. However,
if you wish to convert and come with me, then return.” To convey the
concept of conversion she adds the term mother’s house instead of
‘father’s house,’ as according to law a Moabite cannot enter the Jewish fold,
and conversion would apply only to the female members of
“However,” continued Na’omi, “that hardly suffices, for as converts, you
will find it difficult to lead a Jewish life in a Moabite household that is
based on ideas contrary to your beliefs.” She spoke to both of them, blessing them
that they be repaid for the kindness they did in providing shrouds for their
husbands’ burials at their own expense. In addition, they gave up their
entitlements in order to help her: “May you be repaid for the kindness you did
for me.”
Ruth Is Singled Out
for a Blessing
Note that the Hebrew word o,hag you dealt, is in the masculine form. Na’omi was indicating that
what they did was essentially a man’s task. Thus, they understood that she was
referring to their having provided burial shrouds for their husbands.
At this stage, Orpah also intended to convert. Only later did she change
her mind. The letter v in the word vagh is silent, signifying that at first both
sisters-in-law were willing to convert, but in the outcome only one of them
did.
In verse 9, Na’omi continued to address them: “Until now I have blessed
you both equally. However, I wish to give another blessing — an even greater
one — that will be directed at only one of you: May God grant that you
find... May only ‘one’ of you find peace...” The word itmnu is lacking a v, signifying that the blessing was directed at only one of the
daughters-in-law (cf. Ruth Rabbah 2:15, where the Midrash interprets the word
in a different way). It is interesting to note that while in verse 8 the v in vagh is kethib but
not keri, here, the v
is absent altogether. In the previous verse the blessing was addressed to both
sisters-in-law, but only one of them took advantage of it by converting. This
blessing, on the other hand, was directed at only one of them to begin
with; hence, the v is omitted
altogether.
Found in
The blessing itself promises the contentment associated with royalty.
This is called vthmn, literally, ‘a
valuable find.’ A word originating from the same root tmn appears in the passage dealing with
The Midrash (Genesis Rabbah 41:4) on the verse, I have ‘found’ my
servant David (Psalms 89:21), remarks: “Where did God find him? In
The Significance of vjubn
What is the significance of the word vjubn? It is an allusion to the concept of ‘levirate marriage.’ Na’omi
indicated that one of the sisters-in-law would marry a relative of her dead
husband, thus perpetuating his name. One of them would convert and become the
wife of a nobleman in
Ruth, however, was different. Her deceased husband Machlon left her a
spark of his holy Jewish soul. This spirit remained pulsating within her until
her union with a redeemer. Then, his spirit entered her and joined with the
spirit of Machlon. Together they united with her spirit, and this threesome
imbued the child with a holiness that rendered him eligible for to become the
progenitor of kings. All this was necessary so that offshoots would emerge from
the stock of Jesse in the form of David and Solomon.
This spirit, which had been pulsating restlessly inside her, would
settle down only when she married a redeemer from whom the future King of
Israel would issue. We can now appreciate how appropriate Na’omi’s words were: And
you shall find contentment. David would come into the world as a direct
consequence of the state of ‘contentment’ enjoyed by Machlon’s spirit when Ruth
married Boaz.
Now we can understand why the masculine plural ofk (to) you, is employed here even though, as we
explained earlier, Na’omi was addressing only one of the sisters-in-law.
Ruth was counted as two people since she carried the identity of her
husband Machlon, too. This accounts for the masculine grammatical form, because
the collective term for a man and a woman is generally the masculine form ofk the man being considered the more important of the
two.
What’s in a Kiss?
She kissed them and they cried loudly. Na’omi was wise as
well as righteous, and she had good reason for kissing them. The Zohar (Volume
2, 254a) explains that kissing mouth to mouth is not merely a physical show of
love. It enables the souls of the two people to become attached to one another.
Na’omi knew that one of her daughters-in-law would have the privilege of
being the source of the ‘splendor of
The sisters-in-law realized that Na’omi was about to take leave of them
and they wept loudly. The kiss, as we said, was purely physical for Orpah. As
for Ruth, since she was the destined one, her spirit found a common link with
Na’omi’s and was aroused, together with the spirit of Machlon contained within
her.
Later (verse 14), we see that Orpah kissed her mother-in-law again.
Still, their spirits could not unite as there was no spiritual attraction
between them, just as ‘straw’ has little in common with ‘wheat.’ Ruth, on the
other hand, had chosen to remain in Na’omi’s company, as she felt that their
two spirits had been linked together as one. Hence, it is written Ruth clung
to her (verse 14).
(10) And they said to her: “For we
will return with you to your people.”
(11) But Na’omi said, “Turn back, my
daughters, why should you go with me? Do I have more sons in my womb who can
become husbands for you?
(12) “Turn back, my daughters, go
on your way, for I am too old to have a husband — even if I had
hope that I could marry a man tonight and I could bear sons.
(13) “Would you wait until they
grew up? Would you shut yourselves off and refuse to marry a man? No, my
daughters, it grieves me much for your sakes, but the hand of God has gone out
against me.”
First we will concentrate on verse 10.
(i)The word hf, for, does
not seem appropriate in the context.
(ii)Furthermore, what are the sisters-in-law adding? They knew that
Na’omi was aware of their intentions to accompany her to
(iii) ln verse 11 we find that for the first time Na’omi addresses them as
my daughters. Why only now and not earlier?
(iv) Na’omi asked, Why should you. go with me? What kind
of question is this? She knew they wanted to convert to Judaism.
(v) Na’omi’s rhetoric in verses 12 and 13 seems confusing. What purpose
was there in asking all these questions if she knew it was not possible? Is it
conceivable that they should have the slightest intention of waiting until she
married again so that they could marry sons who would only be born in her old
age?
(vi) Na’omi repeated her argument
thrice over: Do I have more sons.. .I am too old to have a
husband... even if I had hope that I could marry...
All this is really a repetition of the same idea, and it was practically
impossible at her age in any case.
(vii) Why did she interrupt herself by adding, in verse 12: Turn back,
my daughters. She could have simply said, “Do I have more sons.. .1 am too
old to have a husband.”
(viii) In verse 13 she used two
expressions which convey similar ideas: Will you wait.. .will you
shut yourselves off? Why did she choose these particular words: vbdg, vbrca, ?
(ix) Besides that, her words would have made more sense had she arranged
them as follows: “Will you wait for them? Will you shut yourselves off for them
until they have grown up?” Note that I have inserted the latter clause after
the second question rather than after the first. What did Na’omi intend by
saying it the way she did?
(x) What did Na’omi mean by saying, It grieves me much for your sakes?
Is she attempting to supply a reason as to why they should not want to marry?
If so, couldn’t she have simply said, “for you will grow old”?
(xi)The final words in verse 13 are equally perplexing, for it seems
that Na’omi was complaining against God. The Midrash (Ruth Rabbah 2:17)
suggests that she was sorry about their having married her sons in the first
place. This is difficult to understand. Here she was trying to console them,
but these words could only have served to cause them distress.
Was Na’omi Mistaken?
In order to fully understand these verses, we must discover the true
intentions of Ruth and Orpah. They were informing Na’omi that she was mistaken
about their resolve: “Your request that we should leave you and return
indicates that you have misunderstood us when we asked to accompany you to
Hence they declared.. .No! For we will return with you to your people
— not just to your land. Now we can see how appropriate the word hf (for) is here. Previously, it had been assumed
that they wished only to return to the
Following this, Na’omi felt a motherly love for them and called them my
daughters, a title she had never previously accorded them. Still, we should
take note that the word h,bc my daughters, lacks
a vav after the nun. This is to signify that she meant to address
only one of them as a daughter.
Na’omi was still unsure of their exact intentions. She said: “You have
told me that you wish to return with me to my people, for you wish to convert.
However, since you have stressed to your people and not ‘to your land,’
I presume that you wish to accompany me to
“If your intention is indeed to accompany me to
Orpah Is Persuaded to
Return
This explains the Hebrew ohabtk ofk uhvu, who can become husbands for you. Though Na’omi didn’t
expect them to wait and see if she would bear more children, as it would hardly
be natural for her to do so at her age, she still added this clause in an
attempt to dissuade them from converting and to note their reactions to her
questions. They might well have answered that the only reason they wished to
remain with her was to learn from her righteous ways. On the other hand, if
they were not sincere, they would not have accepted her arguments and might
have used them as an excuse to return to
It is here that we notice a significant difference between Ruth and
Orpah. Na’omi’s ploy worked and Orpah’s reaction indicated that these arguments
were sufficient to remove any vestige of shame she might have felt over leaving
Na’omi to return home. Hence we read that she kissed her mother-in-law and
returned to her people and her god.
Ruth, on the other hand, ignored Na’omi’s remarks and indicated that she
had no intention of marrying one of her sons again. She had resolved to remain
with her and begged her to refrain from forcing her to return to
Na’omi continued by saying: “If your intention in telling me that you
will return with me to my people is to become a member of my faith with my
help, but that then you wish to return to your land and home, then I say:
Return to God with my help and then go to your land, for there you will be able
to serve God, too.”
‘Don’t Wait for Me!’
Na’omi spoke gently to them so it would not appear as if she were
pushing them away forcefully, for she knew that once they returned home, they
would revert to their old habits and serve idols with the rest of their
families.
Na’omi said: “When I asked, Do I have more sons? it provided
sufficient excuse for you to change your minds and go back home, especially
since there is no future for me. I am too old to get married again and am
unable to bear any more children. Even if I do have any chance of bearing a
child and get married tonight so that I can give birth as soon as possible -and
bear two sons, one for each of you, it is highly unlikely that you will marry
them. How can you be expected to wait until they grow up? You will both be too
old to get married by the time they come of age.
“Perhaps you think that you are obligated to bide your time and refrain
from marrying, because of your relationship with my sons. No, my daughters, there
is no reason for you to remain single for their sakes. Even if you had
converted to Judaism while you were still married, the law states that the
widow of a man whose younger brother was not his contemporary is not only
excluded from the obligation of levirate marriage (Talmud Yebamoth 17b), but
she is forbidden to marry him. No, the Torah does not require you to wait until
I bear sons, for, whatever the case, you won’t marry them. If you had already
been converted then, you would have been prohibited from marrying them, as I
have said. Therefore, I would never permit such a marriage to take place, even
if it means that you will remain single for a long time to come.”
We can now understand the Midrash which explains the words, it
grieves me..., to mean that Na’omi was sorry that they had ever married her
sons. She meant to say that she was distressed over the trouble caused to them
through her sons: “If, on the other hand, you had not converted, your marriages
to my sons were never legally binding, and you would be permitted to marry any
of my future sons according to the law. Still I say, No, my daughters, for I
am deeply grieved that I did not prevent them from marrying you. Even
though the marriages were invalid, I feel that the hand of God has gone out
against me and I should have been condemned to death. I am fortunate to
have survived thus far, but at any moment the hand of God will strike me down.
How can I contemplate sanctioning a union which will have come about as a
direct consequence of your relationship to my sons? It would give the
impression that I had not repented of my sin. One further transgression,
however light, would be sufficient reason to destroy me.”
The ‘Hand of God’ and
Its ‘Five Fingers’
The Midrash (Ruth Rabbah 2:18) explains: “The hand of God has gone out
against me, my sons and my husband.” This seems to contradict the simple
meaning of the text which has only against me. How did the Sages know
that she is referring to her sons and husband, too? Furthermore, although they
quote the last phrase in the verse, the hand of God, they do not explain
its meaning at all!
Apparently, they had difficulty in explaining the word vtmh, has gone out, since in the context a more
suitable phrase would have been hc vtc (come unto me), or hc vgdb (affected me). Furthermore,
what does the hand of God signify?
In the opinion of the Sages, the hand of God had already gone forth
against her. Later (verse 21) she says, I went out full. The Midrash
(Ruth Rabbah 3:7) comments: “This teaches us that she left
We must also take note of the Midrash (Exodus Rabbah 5:14) which
comments on the words, And
From this Midrash it is clear that the hand of God signifies five
different plagues or afflictions, corresponding to the five fingers of a hand.
Here, too, when Na’omi said that the hand of God has gone out against
me, she was alluding to five individual misfortunes that had befallen her.
The Sages concluded that these concerned herself, her children and her husband.
Later (verse 20) Na’omi testified: For the Almighty has dealt
bitterly with me. She had become very depressed and forlorn; this was the
last of the five misfortunes to strike her. Previously, she had suffered on
four separate occasions. She had lost three sons one by one — Machlon, Kilyon
and the son she carried while leaving
Hence, the verse reads as follows: “The hand of God has gone out
against me. Since I have suffered as a result of these four misfortunes,
the ‘hand’ of God has now completed its work.”
Na’omi’s Spiritual
Link with Ruth
From the context it appears as if Na’omi addressed both
daughters-in-law. Samuel the prophet, with his Divine inspiration, hints that
Na’omi was endowed with a Divine intuition. In verse 8 the word vbfk, go, is written in full, while later, in verse 12, ifk is lacking the letter heh at the end of the
word. Furthermore, as we pointed out earlier, the words vbca and h,bc in verse 12 are both
missing the letter vav. These discrepancies can be explained as follows.
When Na’omi kissed them in order that their spirits should unite with
hers, she noticed a significant difference between the two sisters-in-law.
While the kiss brought Ruth spiritually closer to her, it had no effect
whatsoever on Orpah. Thus, the word h,bc (my daughters) is lacking a vav, indicating that Na’omi
was addressing only one of the sisters-in-law.
The word vbca (return), is
likewise missing a vav, indicating that only one of them would
return with Na’omi to her people. It transpired that her command was directed
solely at Ruth.
Similarly when Na’omi said ifk, go, the final letter heh was missing, as here the reference was to
Orpah, the one who would return to
To sum up, the words h,bc vbca, return, my daughters, are directed only at
Ruth (despite the plural form), whom Na’omi considered as dear to her as a
daughter. She then turned to Orpah and said, ifk, go back! Note that she does not add h,bc (my daughters) when addressing Orpah.
Both words vbca and ifk are in the plural, as Na’omi wanted them to believe
that she was addressing both of them at once. She didn’t want to hurt Orpah’s
feelings by making it obvious that she intended that only Ruth accompany her.
(14) Then they raised their voices
and wept again. Orriah kissed her mother-in-law, while Ruth clung to her.
(i)The first word in the verse, vba,u is missing an ‘aleph’ before the ‘nun.’ (n)The word sug seems redundant. (iii)We are informed that Orpah
kissed Na’omi. No mention is made of her leaving to return to
(iv)The words clung to her don’t seem the most appropriate in the
circumstances. More correct would have been “remained with her.”
The Midrash (Ruth Rabbah 2:20) explains the absence of the aleph as
signifying the physical fatigue suffered by the women after their exhausting
journey. It is highly unlikely that the intention is that they became weakened
as a result of their weeping, since Orpah hardly cried at all.
Interestingly, if we calculate the lower numerical value of the word vba,u, we arrive at the sum of 23, which is equal to the
lower value of the words sckc ,
We can also derive from here that when Orpah cried she raised the volume
of her voice to twice the usual level before kissing Na’omi (goodbye) and
leaving. Hence, they raised their voices — above the usual level — and
wept again, i.e., they doubled the volume of their cry. Following that, Orpah
kissed her mother-in-law farewell and left. Ruth on the other hand, remained
there, weeping uncontrollably.
Why Did They Weep?
It is also possible that the phrase and wept again indicates their
determination to remain members of Na’omi’s family. They felt sad that they
were left empty-handed after their childless marriages. Until now, their
despair had remained bottled up inside them, but now, after they heard Na’omi
informing them explicitly that it was highly unlikely that she would bear more
sons for them to marry, they could no longer control their emotions and burst
into tears.
They raised their voices and wept again. Earlier, Na’omi had
said ,ohbc hk sugv Do I still have
sons...? The word sug here is not
redundant as we first thought. It reminds us of the sugv Na’omi said earlier (verse 11). The reason why the
daughters-in-law wept now was because Na’omi had said: hufu hk sugv Do I still have sons to offer you in marriage? Hence the
verse here can be understood thus: They wept on account of sug. However, Scripture is referring mainly to Ruth and
not to Orpah. That explains why the aleph in vba,u is missing.
Tamar Also Wept
The Yalkut Shimoni (Ruth 601), in reference to this verse
remarks: “Two women will be remembered for giving their lives for the sake of
the Tribe of Judah: Tamar and Ruth. Tamar cried, ‘I will not leave this house
empty-handed.’ Ruth wept each time her mother-in-law told her, Go my daughter..
.as it is written, They raised their voices...
This Midrash requires some thought. What connection does Tamar have
here? Furthermore, the text implies that both Ruth and Orpah wept, but
according to the Yalkut it seems that only Ruth cried!
In addition, the Yalkut states that Ruth wept each time Na’omi
told her to go. In fact, Na’omi only told her Go, my daughter, once, in
chapter two when she allowed Ruth to gather stalks in the fields. There was
certainly no reason to cry then. Besides, that had nothing to do with giving
her life for
The Rabbis of the Midrash had to overcome three basic difficulties
before fully understanding the passage. (i)The aleph is absent from the
word vba,u. (ii)The word sug seems redundant. (iii)Both girls cried though one was
leaving and the other remained with Na’omi.
The absence of the aleph implies that there was another woman
elsewhere in the Scriptures who raised her voice and wept. That woman was
Tamar. The Sages also maintained that Ruth cried at this point because Na’omi
addressed her together with Orpah as if they were on the same level of piety.
Later when Na’omi told Ruth, follow after
your sister-in-law (verse 15), Ruth also cried. The extra sug indicates that besides crying together with Orpah,
Ruth cried alone, too.
Orpah Takes Leave of
Na’omi While Ruth Remains
We asked why no mention was made of Orpah’s
return to her mother’s house after she took leave of Na’omi. It is possible
that the prophet wished to emphasize the difference between Ruth and Orpah. The
latter was hesitant to leave Na’omi only because she was her mother-in-law. Her
strong religious beliefs and convictions didn’t interest Orpah. Thus, we read: Orpah
kissed her mother-in-law. She gave her a goodbye kiss and that was all.
Ruth acted differently. She clung to Na’omi’s
religious beliefs. She was devoted to her mother-in-law not merely because of
their family relationship but because Na omi was a woman of valor. For this
reason the clause “and she (Orpah) returned home” is omitted, as it would
distract us from the main point of the verse, i.e., Ruth’s sincerity.
From this it is clear that the verse
distinguishes between the ways in which the sisters-in-law conducted themselves
towards Na’omi. Na’omi kissed Ruth so that their spirits could unite in a
common bond. Before she accepted Ruth, she had to determine if she was the
‘good dove’ that was destined to come from
The Two Kisses
Now the meaning of the verse is clear. After Na’omi kissed her
daughters-in-law so that her spirit would combine with theirs, Orpah again
kissed her mother-in-law. However, this was a purely physical kiss and thus,
their spirits were unable to find a common link. Ruth, on the other hand, had
received one kiss from Na’omi, and with that, she was spiritually attached to
her mother-in-law. Hence, the point being made here is not Orpah’s return home,
for that does not interest us, but that Ruth became attached to Na’omi while
Orpah did not. In this way the prophet highlights the righteousness of Ruth.
There is another, simpler reason for omitting any mention of Orpah’s
return. She did not return immediately. While she was still with them,
Na’omi turned to Ruth and said: Look! Your sister-in-law has returned... (see
next verse). She said this to emphasize that Orpah was not only returning to
her home but also was reverting to her old ways and would worship idols as she
once did. She would not adapt to the ways of the Jews or accept the Law of
Moses in any way. Na’omi wanted Orpah to hear what she was saying, as earlier
it seemed that both Ruth and Orpah would continue to serve God whatever
happened — even if they returned to
Orpah Returns to Her
Now that Orpah was leaving her, Na’omi
addressed Ruth, saying: “She should not think that in her own home it will be
easy for her to serve God. I admit that it was I who first suggested that she
return, but then I thought it would be a good idea. She can’t blame me though,
if she ends up worshiping idols.”
Na’omi deliberately spoke to Ruth while Orpah
was still within hearing distance: “Now your sister-in-law is returning to her
people and her god.” With this she intended to convey that ‘serving gods’ was
an inevitable consequence of returning to her people. Na’omi hoped that Orpah
would get the message that a return to
(15) So she said,”Look!
Your sister-in-law has returned to her people and her god. Follow
after your sister-in-law.”
Na’omi thought that Ruth was too embarrassed to leave her and needed to
be persuaded to follow Orpah. To test her sincerity she said: Look! Your
sister-in-law has returned. By this she intended to say: “You need not feel
embarrassed for Orpah has made the first move.”
In her own way, Na’omi was attempting to befriend Ruth.[10] With these words,
she was eliminating the possibility of Ruth voicing a wish to follow Orpah,
with the intention of continuing to serve God in her home in
Alternatively, it is possible that Na’omi was not advising Ruth to
follow Orpah in all respects. “Follow her, but not her god. Don’t be led astray
in the same way that she is being led astray.”
(16) But Ruth said: “Don’t press me to leave you; to turn back from
following after you. For wherever you go I will go; where you
lodge I will lodge; your people are my people and your God, my God.”
(17) “Where you die I will die and
there I will be buried. So may God do to me and so may He continue, for
only death will separate between me and you.
(i)ln verse 16, there seems to be an unnecessary repetition of
expressions: to leave you; to turn back...
(ii)Froan the text it appears that when Ruth declares: Where you will
go, I will go... she is giving reasons for remaining with her
mother-in-law. But, how appropriate are these ‘reasons’? They don’t seem to fit
in with anything said previously. As for the clause, your people are my
people and your God my God, this should have been said either at the
beginning or at the end of her statement but not right in the middle.
(iii) Where you will die... needs an explanation as does the
assertion: There will I be buried!
Regarding this last question our Sages (Ruth Rabbah 2:25) explain that
she was referring to the fact that those executed by order of the court by
means of stoning or burning are not buried together with those who are executed
by strangulation or by the sword. This is somewhat difficult to understand, as
we are instructed to teach a would-be proselyte the hard things that come with
Judaism as well as the easy ones. However, this particular point of law does
not have to be taught to them before they convert.
Ruth Assures Na’omi
It is possible that Ruth told Na’omi the following:
“Look, you have been constantly urging me to return to my people. I have
no doubt that you are testing me to see if I am sincere or if I am not really
interested and will eventually return to Moab like Orpah did. Do not press me
any longer; there is no reason to do so, for I am not like Orpah. I am serious
about following in the ways of God. In fact, since I have resolved never to
leave God, your efforts are only serving to distance me from you. That is why I
am adamant that from today, whereuer you go I will go and whereuer you
lodge, I shall lodge. You need not worry about my faith in God, for I
have resolved that your people are my people and your God, my God. A
return to my land would not be tantamount to a return to my nation and my god
as you very well realize.
“You might wonder why I am insisting on returning with you to your country
if I am convinced that I can remain true to my beliefs in
There will I be buried. Don’t think that I will go there without you. So rr~y
God do to me and so may He continue, for nothing but death will
separate us.
Ruth Accepts Mosaic
Law
The Talmud (Yebamoth 47b) explains the meaning
of the text to be a dialogue between Ruth and Na’omi, who tried to dissuade the
former from joining the Jewish people because of the myriad responsibilities
incumbent on a Jew.
Na’omi told her: “It is forbidden to walk long
distances out of town on Sabbath.” Ruth replied: Whereuer you go, I
will go. Na’omi said: “A private meeting between man and woman is
forbidden.” Ruth responded: Where you lodge, I will lodge.
Na’omi said: “We must keep 613 commandments.”
Ruth asserted: Your people are my people. Na’omi told her: “We
must not serve or bow to foreign gods.” To which Ruth declared: Your God
is my God.
Na’omi explained: “There are four methods of
execution practiced by the Sanhedrin.” Biblical law makes clear which crimes
are punishable by each form of execution. Ruth acknowledged this: Whereuer you
will die, I will die.
Na’omi said: “There are two distinct burial
places reserved for those executed by the Sanhedrin.” Ruth asserted: There
will I be buried.
Ruth Learns about
‘Mitzvoth’
Why did Na’omi select these particular mitzuoth
and points of law as examples of Judaic practice? Firstly, only two —
Sabbath and seclusion — are selected and only then does she tell Ruth
that 613 precepts must be kept. Following that, she tells her of idol worship
and the various methods of execution. Aren’t these laws contained within the
613? Wouldn’t it have been more appropriate to begin or end with the statement
that Jews are required to keep all 613 commandments? Why is this brought to her
attention in the middle of the dialogue?
There is, however, method and logic in Na’omi’s choice of subjects.
Besides conveying to Ruth the importance of both the easy and difficult aspects
of Jewish living, Na’omi takes their present location into account, for Ruth
was being introduced into the Jewish nation at that specific time and she had
to know how to live as a Jew from that moment on. Moreover, Na’omi felt she had
to make known to Ruth the three crimes which Judaism considers to be the most
serious: forbidden sexual relations, idol worship and bloodshed.
Na’omi might have questioned Ruth as follows: “What would you, as a
Jewess, do in these circumstances? You have left the town and are walking in
the countryside where few people, if any, are in evidence. Indeed, the only
people you are likely to meet are rogues or highwaymen intent on evil. Such
people would, without doubt, attempt to assault you.” Indeed, our Sages note
(Ruth Rabbah 4:4) that her appearance was so seductive that anyone staring at
her would be sexually aroused to the point of a seminal discharge.
“Were you yet a gentile woman, it would be of no consequence, but being
that you are now Jewish, you have to guard yourself from any forbidden sexual
act, and this may prove difficult on a journey through a remote area where no
help can be expected from other people.
“The truth is, that by adhering to the Sabbath laws of domains, there is
a greater likelihood that you will be accosted by a stranger since you must
acquire a place of residence before the Sabbath begins and are forbidden to
leave a given area for the duration of the Sabbath. This will make it easier
for someone to trap you and dishonor you. You may find a guide who is willing
to escort you and protect you; but you may be forced to enter his home at night
and forget that remaining in private with him is forbidden.”
Na’omi introduced Ruth to Judaism by
concentrating on the laws most likely to affect her in the immediate future;
the laws of Sabbath boundaries and laws of being alone with a man. Ruth agreed
to keep the Sabbath by answering Whereuer you go I will go. “By
following you, I shall be sure to keep within the permitted domain.”
As to private meetings she adds, “Wherever you lodge,
I will lodge, for there will be no strange man with us.”
Once Na’omi had taught her about forbidden
sexual contacts, she also wanted to impart to Ruth the gravity of worshiping
idols but did not want to make it seem as if she suspected her of practicing
pagan customs. Thus, first she informs Ruth of the number of precepts each Jew
is required to keep and only then, as if by the way, does she mention that idol
worship is forbidden. She then goes on to warn Ruth of the death penalties
imposed by the courts for such serious crimes as bloodshed, as well as idol
worship. To impress upon Ruth the gravity of these deeds she spells out that
even after their execution, the sin has not been entirely obliterated, for the
sinners’ bodies will be buried in separate plots, each according to the crime
committed.
Regarding the various death penalties, Ruth
says, So shall God do to me and so shall He continue, and
as to the various burial places, she adds, only death will separate us,
for it is known that each righteous person acquires a ‘home’ for himself after
death, unlike the wicked about whom it is said that their evil deeds remain
evident even after death by the fact that they are buried away from others.
There is another possible way to understand
these words, as if they were spoken about a spiritual process. However, an
introduction is necessary.
Firstly, while a person is in this world, he is in the process of
‘going,’ as Scripture says, . . .for man is going to his eternal home...
(Ecclesiastes 12:5). In addition, the Mishnah warns Know... .where you are
going (Ethics 3:1). In my commentary to that mishnah, I explained that man
is constantly on the move from the day of his birth until the day of his death,
as his life is gradually slipping away.
Secondly, the Zohar (Volume 2, 98b) remarks that the soul of a
proselyte is bound up with the soul of a righteous man while the soul of a
woman convert is bound up with that of a righteous woman.
Thirdly, the Zohar in its introduction to Parshath Vayechi (Volume
1, 218a; cf. Talmud Kethuboth 104a) tells us that when a man goes to his
eternal home on High, all those who are to be his neighbors in his new ‘home’
come and lead him to his place. This concept is derived from the words, And
he was gathered to his people (Deuteronomy 32:50); And you shall
be gathered to your people (Numbers 27:13). Those who share his place of
honor in the next world are called his people. They gather him
and lead him to his appropriate place.
Fourthly, we are taught that God does not attach His name to a righteous
man until he has died (Midrash Tanchuma, Toldoth 7).
Finally, as we have mentioned before, our Sages say that even though it
is considered honorable to be buried in the Land of Israel, it is all the more
beneficial for the soul if he actually dies in the Land of Israel, for one
cannot compare giving a soul back to its ‘mother’ to giving it to a stranger
(Jerusalem Talmud Kethuboth 12:3).
‘Wherever You Will Go — I Will Go’
Coming back to our verse, Ruth says, Don’t
press me. When a would-be proselyte is gently dissuaded by being asked,
“What do you see [in Judaism] that you wish to convert?” (Talmud Yebamoth 47a),
the intention is not to dishearten him totally, but to push him away gently as
with a ‘left hand.’ At the same time he is drawn closer with the ‘right hand’
to test his sincerity. We must not push him away too many times — two or three
times is enough. If he persists in wishing to become one of us, we must soften our
attitude towards him. Ruth claimed that she had been constantly rebuffed,
presumably to test her sincerity. However, she had not been rejected outright.
“Now,” she says, “if you continue to urge me to return to my land, I will feel
as if I have been rejected outright and you are not interested in my
conversion.
“Do not press me to leave you. Any further
attempts to dissuade me on your part will only serve to indicate that you
suspect me of having evil intentions. It will appear that you think it is not fitting
that you aid me in converting, lest I return to my old ways. However, I am not
so inclined, for whereuer you go, I will go. I am certain that my soul,
which is ‘going’ towards its eternal home — as it says, A man goes to his
eternal home (Ecclescaites 12:5) — will become attached to your
soul, especially since you have the credit for helping me to convert, and it is
reckoned as if you bore me. (“A proselyte is like a newly born babe” [Talmud
Yebamoth 22a].) I shall follow you on the path of God that you take towards the
World to Come. Thus, in Paradise, where you shall lodge, I shall
lodge, for my soul will be bound up together with yours; it will not be the
soul of a Moabite which has nothing whatsoever in common with a Jewish soul.
“On your arrival in Heaven, the neighbors will come and lead your soul
to its rightful place in
“All this concerns the soul. As for my physical body, whereuer you
die, I shall die,” i.e., in the
Two Souls — One Destiny
So may God do for me. “If this promise is fulfilled and I go where you
go, then He will continue to do for me so that your people will be my
people. Your companions [in Heaven] will be my companions and your
God will be called my God, too, for only death will separate between me
and you. The kiss that united our spirits and bound up our souls has made
us like one. Our lives will have a common destiny. Only in death will we be
separated, for one of us will surely die before the other. Yet, when the second
one dies, the bond between us will once again be restored.”
Alternatively, “Just as God has done for me, that whereuer you will
go I will go, so may He continue to do —for your people will be my
people. Deep down I know that I am righteous and that when death separates
us it will be no more than a physical separation, for we will not be buried in
the same grave. Our souls have been bound together forever
— even more so after death — since the kiss you gave me forged a common
link between our two spirits. I am not like the wicked who even during their
lifetime are considered as good as dead, while the righteous are ‘alive.’ Only
death itself will separate us, and not sin.”
A Blessing Fulfilled
It is possible that the words of this verse
refer to the blessing Na’omi gave to Ruth earlier. In verse 8 we explained that
when Na’omi told Ruth that she would find contentment, she was alluding to the
fact that her marriage would be in the form of a levirate union, and thus the
spirit of Machlon, which had taken refuge within her, could be placated.
Consequently, she would become the source of the Royal House of David. As we
said, this blessing applied only to one of the sisters-in-law.
Here Ruth responds to the challenge: “I am
willing to convert. Don’t push me away for God will do for me, as you
yourself said, God will do for you... (verse 8), and that deed refers to
conversion. So will He continue to do, for you gave me a second
blessing, namely, that God will grant me contentment... (verse 9). This
second blessing will be realized when I marry into a family from which the
royal seed of David will issue.
Only death will separate us. “The son which will result from a levirate
marriage will in essence be your son, for he shall be imbued with the spirit of
Machlon. Whether now, while I have the spirit of your son within me, or
whether later, when it will be transferred into my son, there will always be a
bond between us. This would not be possible if I were to marry anyone else, as
the spirit of Machlon would leave me and I would lose my connection with
you even before one of us dies.”
(18) But she saw that she was
steadfast [in her decision) to go with her, and she stopped speaking to her.
The more she was spoken to, the more resolute Ruth became. This
is contrary to nature, since a series of logical arguments generally serves to
weaken the other’s position. Thus Na’omi stopped speaking to her altogether in
the hope that this would silence Ruth.
Alternatively, she remained steadfast refers to Na’omi. As we
said in verse 5, Na’omi had sinned by not protesting her husband’s decision to
live outside
Another meaning may be as follows: But she saw... Na’omi saw that
Ruth was determined to go now, even if it meant traveling with her alone and
not waiting for a company of people. She acknowledged the fact and that God had
ordered the matter and thus she ceased to dissuade Ruth.
Based on a previous explanation we can understand the verse in yet
another way. As we said, Na’omi kissed Ruth in order that their spirits could
unite. The only way Na’omi could know that their souls had been bound up with
each other was if she noticed a definite willingness on Ruth’s part to
follow her. This being the case, she stopped urging her to return, as
Ruth had proved herself to be a well-intentioned proselyte. There was no
further need to test her.
NOTE:
Verse 13, in the Hebrew, contains a pesik ‘|’.
* * *
This study was
written by Hillel ben David
(Greg Killian).
Comments may be
submitted to:
Greg Killian
1101 Surrey Trace SE
San Antonio, TX 78252
Internet
address: gkilli@aol.com
Web page: http://www.betemunah.org/
(360) 918-2905
Return to The WATCHMAN home page
Send comments to Greg
Killian at his email address: gkilli@aol.com
[1] Abraham having come to Palestine from Ur of the Chaldees.
[2] Heavy to bear.
[3] See Yevamos 61b-62a and the Yerushalmi Yevamos 2:6 in accordance with the opinion of R. shimon ben Lakish.
[4] The classic medieval commentators (see Moreh Nevuchim 1:2) differentiated between three primary motivations: 1) the "good," that which is intrinsically moral; 2) the "pleasant," which is satisfying to the senses; and 3) the "beneficial," which offers a pragmatic advantage.
[5] Yevamos 47a; Rambarn, Hilchos lsurei Bi'ah 13:7; Yoreh De'ah 268:2, 12.
[6] See lbn Ezra on these words. His commentary seems to concur with the Aishich’s explanation. See also Iggereth Shmuel.
[7] lndeed, we see later that this is exactly what happened. Na’omi made sure that Boaz, the son of her father’s brother Salmon (see 4:21 and Talmud Bava Bathra 91a: “Elimelech, Salmon, Ploni Almoni and the father of Na’omi were all the sons of Nachshon, the son of Aminadav”), would become acquainted with Ruth.
[8] See Midrash Lekach Tov on this verse: “May God deal kindly with you. This teaches us that a proselyte does not find happiness in this world.” Similarly our Sages ask (Talmud Yebamoth 48b): “Why do the proselytes suffer? Because they waited before converting so that their former iniquities would be cancelled out.” Therefore the kethib is vagh and the ken is agh.
[9] See Talmud Yebamoth 69a. Although a Moabite can convert to Judaism if he so wishes, he cannot marry into the Jewish people, as can a Moabitess.
[10] According to this it is possible to explain the opinion of Ibn Ezra, who maintains that Ruth and Orpah converted to Judaism before they married Machlon and Kilyon. The Akeidath Yitzchok asks that if this is the case, any attempt by Na’omi to persuade Ruth to return would be tantamount to enticing her to idol worship. The Aishich has given us to understand that Na’omi’s words were said so as to prevent Ruth from returning to her mother’s house.